# Recent article landscape on BRCA1 DNA repair (2023-2026)

Generated: 2026-09-06 | TOPIC: brca1_dna_repair | Scope: survey of recent (2023-01-01 to 2026-09-06) journal literature on BRCA1 in DNA double-strand break repair / homologous recombination (HR), spanning molecular mechanism and translational/therapeutic landscape.

## Executive Summary

The 2023-2026 literature redefined BRCA1 DNA repair biology on two fronts. Mechanistically, separation-of-function alleles finally proved the BRCA1-BARD1 E3 ubiquitin ligase is essential for end resection and completion of homology-directed repair [1], and the CST complex was shown to be the critical resection blockade that BRCA1-BARD1 selectively relieves, directly wiring pathway choice to PARP inhibitor response [2]. Translationally, acquired PARP inhibitor resistance in BRCA1-deficient cancers is dominated by genetic restoration of HR — BRCA1/2 reversion mutations in 60% of resistant metastatic breast cancers [3] and 79% of TOPARP-B prostate cancers [4] — reframing resistance monitoring around longitudinal ctDNA.

Key findings:
- BRCA1-BARD1 ligase activity, multivalent nucleosome bridging, and CTCF-primed chromatin recruitment are now established as coupled, drug-relevant steps of HR [1, 5-7].
- Fork protection is dynamically regulated (RNA-DNA hybrid shielding resolved by DDX39A) and mechanistically separable from HR strand exchange [13-15].
- BRCA1-dependent R-loop resolution (SETX-BRCA1-BARD1 complex) and transcription-replication conflicts have emerged as structural and synthetic-lethal frontiers [16, 17].
- Phase separation/condensates organize BRCA1-complex recruitment at damage sites [18-20].
- Clinically, PARPi benefit varies by BRCA1 mutation domain [22], resistance accrues via reversions plus splice-site hijacking and reversion-independent routes [3, 4, 27, 28], and combination (ATR/CHK1 + PARPi, PARPi + immunotherapy) and biomarker (functional RAD51 vs scar assays) strategies are maturing [32, 33, 39, 40].

## Data Sources

| Source | Type | Query / accession | Date accessed |
|---|---|---|---|
| PubMed / Europe PMC via biomcp_article_search | Literature (aspect 1: HR mechanism) | 16 sequential searches, dateRange "2023-01-01/", limit 10-15 (e.g. "BRCA1 BARD1 homologous recombination"; see reports/brca1_dna_repair/brca1_hr_mechanism.md query log) | 2026-09-06 |
| PubMed / Europe PMC via biomcp_article_search | Literature (aspect 2: therapy/resistance) | 5 searches, dateRange "2023-01-01/", limit 15 (e.g. "BRCA1 PARP inhibitor resistance") | 2026-09-06 |
| biomcp_article_get (DOI verification, sections=["core"]) | Record verification | 6 calls (e.g. DOI 10.1016/j.annonc.2024.01.003 → PMID 38244928) | 2026-09-06 |
| ClinicalTrials.gov via biomcp_trial_search / biomcp_trial_get | Trial registry | 4 calls; NCT03462342, NCT03787680, NCT06065059 | 2026-09-06 |
| biomcp_gene_search | Server smoke test | query="BRCA1", limit=1 → NCBI Gene 672 | 2026-09-06 |

Scope: 43 cited sources (40 journal articles with PMIDs/DOIs, 3 NCT trial records); publication window 2023-01-01 to 2026-09-06; primary research emphasized, 5-6 authoritative reviews included. Quality notes: multi-concept PubMed queries with >4 terms returned empty sets and were recovered by simplification (possible missed narrowly scoped papers); Semantic Scholar was rate-limited (HTTP 429) and excluded.

## Analysis Methodology

- Mode: `no-interview light-research` — user interview waived by leading prefix; topic decomposed into the top TWO aspects only: (1) BRCA1 HR mechanism (structure/function, pathway choice, fork protection, R-loops, LLPS), (2) translational therapy/resistance landscape (PARPi efficacy, resistance mechanisms, combinations, biomarkers, trials).
- Execution: Tier B parallel generic subagents (2 workers), each applying the worker protocol: sequential biomcp calls only, source-side filtering (specific terms, limit, dateRange), retry ladder (max 3 attempts per query), no internal knowledge, identifiers copied verbatim from tool output. Per-aspect outputs with full query logs: `reports/brca1_dna_repair/brca1_hr_mechanism.md` (19 sources) and `reports/brca1_dna_repair/brca1_therapy_resistance.md` (24 sources).
- Synthesis: this report merges both aspect files, re-numbers all citations into one bibliography ordered by first appearance, and reconciles overlapping themes (fork protection appears mechanistically in aspect 1 and as a resistance mechanism in aspect 2; both retained and cross-referenced).

## Findings

### 1. Mechanistic landscape

**1.1 BRCA1-BARD1 E3 ligase, chromatin recognition, and recruitment.** Full-length-complex separation-of-function alleles (a truly ligase-null variant versus a histone-targeting-impaired variant) settled the 25-year controversy: RING ligase activity drives DNA end resection and late stages of homology-directed repair, and its loss hypersensitizes cells to DNA-damaging agents [1]. Mechanistically, a high-affinity intrinsically disordered DNA-binding region in BARD1 cooperates with ankyrin-BRCT reading of H2AK15ub and H4K20me0 to support H2A ubiquitylation, chromatin recruitment, and survival [5]; high-speed AFM showed BRCA1-BARD1 physically bridges di-nucleosomes and linker DNA, enhancing E3 catalysis on partially H4K20me2-marked chromatin [6]. Upstream, CTCF establishes a repressive-chromatin cascade (HP1γ/KAP1/SUV39H1/SETDB1/KDM5A) that licenses rapid BRCA1/BARD1 loading and extensive resection [7]. BARD1 also engages a conserved pre-ribosomal RNA site required for HR, coupling repair to rRNA biogenesis [8], and the H2AK13/15ub writer-reader-eraser axis shared with 53BP1 remains the pivotal recruitment switch [9].

**1.2 Pathway choice and the BRCA1-PALB2-BRCA2-RAD51 axis.** The CST complex (CTC1-STN1-TEN1) suppresses resection through two branches — EXO1 blockade and BLM-DNA2 restriction; BRCA1-BARD1 selectively relieves the EXO1 blockade, and CST mutants produce hyper-resection and PARP inhibitor resistance in BRCA1-deficient cells [2]. At replication-coupled DSBs, Shieldin loss (Shld2/Shld3, independent of 53BP1) partially restores HR in BRCA1-BRCT-deficient cells in a CST-dependent manner [10]. Downstream, the PALB2 strand-exchange domain is itself intrinsically disordered and compacts ssDNA in an oligomerization-dependent, LLPS-prone manner — a chaperone-like IDR mechanism connecting BRCA1-axis scaffolding to RAD51-mediated strand exchange [11]; the broader resection-regulation framework is authoritatively reviewed [12].

**1.3 Replication fork protection, R-loops, and transcription-replication conflicts.** Fork protection is now understood as dynamic: RNA polymerase II forms transient RNA-DNA hybrids that shield stalled forks from DNA2 until DDX39A resolves them; DDX39A loss enhances fork protection and chemoresistance in BRCA1/2-deficient cells [13]. RPA exhaustion via RPA inhibition selectively abrogates restart and synergizes with PARP inhibitors in BRCA1-deficient tumors [14]. A 2026 review synthesizes how RAD51-dependent fork protection, mechanistically separable from HR, is restored in BRCA1/2-mutant tumors and drives PARPi resistance despite persistent HRD scars [15]. On the transcription axis, the SETX-BRCA1-BARD1 complex binds and unwinds R-loops (SETX Ser642-BRCT interaction); disrupting it causes R-loop accumulation, transcription-replication conflicts, and DSBs [16]. Conversely, transcription-replication collisions are a BRCA1-mutant synthetic-lethal vulnerability (MEPCE/PAF1 depletion is lethal in BRCA1-deficient settings) [17].

**1.4 Phase separation and the structural frontier.** K63-polyubiquitin-enhanced RAP80 condensation recruits BRCA1 to DSBs [18]; RNF168 LLPS forms an amplifying feedback loop for H2A.X ubiquitination that accelerates both 53BP1 and BRCA1 recruitment [19]; and BARD1 LLPS assembles XRCC5/Ku80-enriched repair hubs driving temozolomide chemoresistance in glioma [20]. No BRCA1-specific cryo-EM structure paper was retrieved in-window (documented gap); instead, disordered-region biophysics advanced the field — NMR backbone assignments for the BRCA1 IDR 467-696 (~80% of the protein, exon 11-encoded) now anchor mechanistic dissection of the central region [21].

### 2. Translational and therapeutic landscape

**2.1 PARP inhibitor efficacy gradients within BRCA1.** In a 268-patient real-world ovarian cancer cohort, BRCA1 RING (HR 0.08) and BRCT (HR 0.10) domain mutations and missense variants (HR 0.04) derived the greatest olaparib maintenance benefit [22]. PARPi activity extends across HRR genes — a phase II niraparib trial enrolled ATM/BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2/CHEK2-mutant pancreatic cancer [23] — but gradients exist: in 201 HRR-altered mCRPC patients, BRCA1-mutant tumors showed shorter 1-year olaparib time-on-treatment than BRCA2 (23% vs 39%, p = 0.021) [24]. Strategy matters: neoadjuvant niraparib in HRd ovarian cancer (OPAL cohort C) achieved ORR 31.6% vs 70.6% for platinum-taxane and closed early for futility [25], while final PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 patient-reported outcomes confirmed preserved quality of life on first-line niraparib maintenance [26].

**2.2 Resistance mechanisms and their reversal.** Longitudinal ctDNA profiling of metastatic breast cancer found BRCA1/2 reversions in 60% of HRD-therapy progressors — including two novel classes (intragenic deletions with intronic breakpoints; secondary splice-acceptor mutations) — frequently co-occurring with TP53BP1/RIF1/PAXIP1 loss, challenging one-mechanism-per-patient models [3]. In TOPARP-B mCRPC, reversions appeared in 79% of BRCA2/PALB2-mutant tumors by end of treatment, 60% flanked by microhomologies implicating POLQ-mediated TMEJ [4]. BRCA1-specifically, secondary splice-site mutations driving exon-11 skipping elevate BRCA1 hypomorphs and were enriched in post-PARPi ARIEL2/ARIEL4 cohorts [27]. Reversion-independent resistance also exists: pre-replication-complex dysfunction (Cdt1/Cdc6/Dbf4 loss) mediates resistance reversible by CDT1/geminin-axis targeting [28]. Contemporary reviews reframe PARPi cytotoxicity around ssDNA gaps and transcription-replication conflicts, position replication-gap suppression as the resistance endpoint, and nominate PARP1 PROTAC degraders and DNA ligase III vulnerabilities in 53BP1-deficient tumors [29-31].

**2.3 Combination strategies.** A resistance-centered pharmacological review maps six resistance classes to matched biomarkers and trials (PETRA, EvoPAR-Prostate01/02, STELLA, MEDIOLA, TOPACIO, ATHENA-COMBO, CAPRI, DUO-O) [32]. A 22-trial meta-analysis (1,849 patients) shows BRCA-mutant tumors respond to PARPi+ICI regardless of PD-L1 status (67% vs 73%, p = 0.643), arguing PD-L1 negativity should not exclude BRCA-mutant patients [33]. CHK1 inhibition (prexasertib) synergizes with olaparib in BRCA-proficient pancreatic models [34]. Registered ATR-combination trials target PARPi-resistant disease directly: CAPRI (ceralasertib+olaparib, recurrent ovarian; completed) [35] and TRAP (same combination, resistant prostate; active, not recruiting) [36]; next-generation pairs are entering but not yet succeeding — the USP1 inhibitor TNG348 + olaparib study in BRCA1/2-mutant/HRD+ tumors was terminated [37]. For platinum re-challenge, first-line PARPi maintenance may shorten subsequent platinum efficacy (HRD-negative subgroup OS HRs 1.09-1.19), prompting a proposed redefinition of platinum resistance by PARPi exposure [38].

**2.4 Biomarkers and functional assays.** A seven-platform HRD classifier comparison in 235 early TNBC tumors (HRDetect, CHORD, scarHRD, CN17, RAD51-FFPE, mRNA, DeepHRD) revealed method-specific discordances requiring workflow harmonization [39]. The functional RAD51 assay predicted pCR in GeparOLA (RAD51-low OR 12.03 for pCR, P = 0.002) [40]; HRD testing is more informative before neoadjuvant chemotherapy (informativity 87% vs 65%; kappa 0.67) [41]; scar assays can misclassify — a BRCA1-mutant, HRDetect-0.96 mucinous endometrial carcinoma was intrinsically niraparib-resistant with a non-HRD high-ploidy signature [42]; and CCDC6 immunostaining plus RAD51 testing may widen PARPi eligibility to BRCA1/2-wild-type HGSOC [43].

## Limitations

- **Scope constraints:** `light-research` mode restricted synthesis to two aspects; patent, GEO/functional-genomics, and germline-risk/epidemiology dimensions were not surveyed. `no-interview` waived clarification, so defaults were assumed: "recent" = 2023-01-01 onward, English-language journal articles + trial registry records, PMIDs required.
- **Evidence gaps (worker-documented):** no BRCA1-specific cryo-EM structure publication retrieved in-window after three query attempts (structural insight came via HS-AFM/NMR); Semantic Scholar rate-limited (HTTP 429), coverage relied on PubMed/Europe PMC; PubMed queries with >4 concepts returned empty sets and were recovered by simplification, so narrowly scoped primary papers may be missed; no dedicated 2023+ monothematic review of BRCA1 HR mechanism was retrieved; one on-topic bioRxiv preprint (PMID 41394680) excluded per journal-article scope; no talazoparib-specific phase 3 search (e.g., TALANA-2) was run.
- **Metadata limitations:** biomcp article tools did not return volume/issue/pages for most records (bibliography carries journal, year, PMID, DOI); biomcp_trial_get core sections did not return phase/sponsor fields, so those are omitted rather than inferred.
- **Generalizability:** quantitative estimates (reversion frequencies, HRs, ORRs) are study-population-specific (breast, ovarian, prostate, pancreatic cohorts) and should not be extrapolated across cancer types; real-world cohorts lack randomization.

## References

[1] Wang M, Li W, et al. Crucial roles of the BRCA1-BARD1 E3 ubiquitin ligase activity in homology-directed DNA repair. Mol Cell. 2023. PMID: 37797621. DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2023.09.015.
[2] Rogers CM, Kaur H, et al. CTC1-STN1-TEN1 controls DNA break repair pathway choice via DNA end resection blockade. Science. 2025. PMID: 40403056. DOI: 10.1126/science.adt3034.
[3] Harvey-Jones E, Raghunandan M, Robbez-Masson L, et al. Longitudinal profiling identifies co-occurring BRCA1/2 reversions, TP53BP1, RIF1 and PAXIP1 mutations in PARP inhibitor-resistant advanced breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2024. PMID: 38244928. DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2024.01.003.
[4] Seed G, Beije N, Yuan W, et al. Elucidating acquired PARP inhibitor resistance in advanced prostate cancer. Cancer Cell. 2024. PMID: 39577422. DOI: 10.1016/j.ccell.2024.10.015.
[5] Witus SR, Tuttle LM, et al. BRCA1/BARD1 intrinsically disordered regions facilitate chromatin recruitment and ubiquitylation. EMBO J. 2023. PMID: 37305927. DOI: 10.15252/embj.2023113565.
[6] Burdett H, Foglizzo M, et al. BRCA1-BARD1 combines multiple chromatin recognition modules to bridge nascent nucleosomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023. PMID: 37823591. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkad793.
[7] Hwang SY, Choi D, et al. CTCF primes repressive chromatin for rapid BRCA1/BARD1 recruitment to drive homologous recombination repair of DNA double-strand breaks. Nucleic Acids Res. 2026. PMID: 42475683. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkag715.
[8] Huang H, Wu D, Yu X. BARD1 recognizes pre-rRNA for DNA damage repair and rRNA biogenesis. J Biol Chem. 2026. PMID: 41895446. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbc.2026.111406.
[9] Shu Q, Liu Y, Ai H. The Emerging Role of the Histone H2AK13/15 Ubiquitination: Mechanisms of Writing, Reading, and Erasing in DNA Damage Repair and Disease. Cells. 2025. PMID: 39996778. DOI: 10.3390/cells14040307.
[10] Feng YL, Wang M, et al. 53BP1-independent Shieldin-BRCA1 antagonism at replication-coupled double-strand breaks. Nat Commun. 2026. PMID: 42374033. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-026-74867-3.
[11] Kyriukha Y, Watkins MB, et al. The strand exchange domain of tumor suppressor PALB2 is intrinsically disordered and promotes oligomerization-dependent DNA compaction. iScience. 2024. PMID: 39584160. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.111259.
[12] Soniat MM, Myler LR. Using the safety scissors: DNA resection regulation at DNA double-strand breaks and telomeres. DNA Repair (Amst). 2025. PMID: 40716322. DOI: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2025.103876.
[13] Song L, Xie H, et al. Dynamic control of RNA-DNA hybrid formation orchestrates DNA2 activation at stalled forks by RNAPII and DDX39A. Mol Cell. 2025. PMID: 39706186. DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2024.11.034.
[14] VanderVere-Carozza PS, Jordan MR, et al. Replication protein A protects lagging strand gaps, restricting PARP inhibitor-induced synthetic lethality in BRCA1-deficient tumors. Nucleic Acids Res. 2026. PMID: 42049240. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkag396.
[15] Anjum RS, Takabe K. RAD51 in Breast Cancer: From Vulnerability to Resistance. World J Oncol. 2026. PMID: 42490812. DOI: 10.14740/wjon2764.
[16] Dutta A, Ji JH, et al. Resolution of R-loops and transcription-replication conflicts by SETX-BRCA1-BARD1 complex. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2026. PMID: 41917467. DOI: 10.1038/s41594-026-01778-8.
[17] Patel PS, Algouneh A, et al. Excessive transcription-replication conflicts are a vulnerability of BRCA1-mutant cancers. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023. PMID: 36928661. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkad172.
[18] Qin C, Wang YL, et al. RAP80 phase separation at DNA double-strand break promotes BRCA1 recruitment. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023. PMID: 37638744. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkad686.
[19] Feng LL, Bie SY, et al. Ubiquitin-induced RNF168 condensation promotes DNA double-strand break repair. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024. PMID: 38968116. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2322972121.
[20] Wang C, Cheng X, et al. BARD1 phase separation orchestrates a repair hub by enriching XRCC5 to drive chemoresistance in glioma. Life Sci. 2026. PMID: 42309254. DOI: 10.1016/j.lfs.2026.124539.
[21] Dinh Hoang H, Jasper AM, et al. The 1H, 15N and 13C backbone resonance assignments of an intrinsically disordered region (467-696) of breast cancer type 1 susceptibility protein (BRCA1). Biomol NMR Assign. 2026. PMID: 42693354. DOI: 10.1007/s12104-026-10277-2.
[22] Marchetti C, Fagotti A, Fruscio R, et al. Benefit from maintenance with PARP inhibitor in newly diagnosed ovarian cancer according to BRCA1/2 mutation type and site: a multicenter real-world study. ESMO Open. 2025. PMID: 40174507. DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2025.104533.
[23] Huffman BM, Diossy M, Yurgelun MB, et al. A Phase II Trial of Niraparib in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Harboring Pathogenic Variants in ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and CHEK2. Clin Cancer Res. 2026. PMID: 41686836. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-24-3766.
[24] Incorvaia L, Santini D, Matrana MR, et al. Global Real-World Outcomes of Olaparib in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Patients With Homologous Recombination Repair Alterations. Int J Cancer. 2026. PMID: 42609124. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.70679.
[25] Westin SN, Belotte J, Felicetti B, et al. Comparing niraparib versus platinum-taxane doublet chemotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with newly diagnosed homologous recombination-deficient stage III/IV ovarian cancer: Findings from cohort C of the OPAL phase 2 trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2026. PMID: 42623963. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2026.07.023.
[26] Shahin MS, Lorusso D, Backes FJ, et al. Updated patient-reported outcomes and the effect of disease progression on health-related quality of life in the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial of niraparib first-line maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2026. PMID: 42385609. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2026.06.010.
[27] Nesic K, Krais JJ, Wang Y, et al. BRCA1 secondary splice-site mutations drive exon-skipping and PARP inhibitor resistance. Mol Cancer. 2024. PMID: 39103848. DOI: 10.1186/s12943-024-02048-1.
[28] Pappas K, Ferrari M, Smith P, et al. BRCA2 reversion mutation-independent resistance to PARP inhibition through impaired DNA prereplication complex function. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025. PMID: 40460119. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2426743122.
[29] Zou Y, Zhang H, Chen P, et al. Clinical approaches to overcome PARP inhibitor resistance. Mol Cancer. 2025. PMID: 40442774. DOI: 10.1186/s12943-025-02355-1.
[30] Abinawanto, Sophian A. Mechanisms of PARP Inhibitor Resistance: From Replication Gap Biology and Transcription-Replication Conflicts to PROTAC-Based Next-Generation Strategies. Environ Mol Mutagen. 2026. PMID: 42590926. DOI: 10.1002/em.70076.
[31] Wang W, Cai C, Qin S, et al. PARP inhibitors and breast cancer: from therapeutic breakthrough to resistance challenge. Exp Mol Med. 2026. PMID: 41963466. DOI: 10.1038/s12276-026-01673-8.
[32] Qin S, An J, Qiao W, et al. Resistance-centered pharmacology of DNA damage response-targeted therapy: Mechanisms, predictive biomarkers, and biomarker-guided adaptive treatment strategies in solid tumors. Biomed Pharmacother. 2026. PMID: 42314345. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2026.119670.
[33] Zhou S, Patel V, Kishi N, et al. Efficacy of PARP inhibitor and immune checkpoint inhibitor combination therapy in PD-L1-negative cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Immunotherapy. 2026. PMID: 42639974. DOI: 10.1080/1750743X.2026.2722581.
[34] Morimoto Y, Musha Y, Takeuchi O, et al. Chk1 inhibition emerges as the most effective partner for PARP inhibition in BRCA-proficient pancreatic cancer. Discov Oncol. 2026. PMID: 42446852. DOI: 10.1007/s12672-026-05581-1.
[35] NCT03462342: Combination ATR and PARP Inhibitor (CAPRI) Trial With AZD6738 and Olaparib in Recurrent Ovarian Cancer. Status: Completed. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03462342
[36] NCT03787680: Targeting Resistant Prostate Cancer With ATR and PARP Inhibition (TRAP Trial). Status: Active, not recruiting. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03787680
[37] NCT06065059: Study to Evaluate TNG348 Alone and With a PARP Inhibitor in Patients With BRCA 1/2 Mutant or HRD+ Solid Tumors. Status: Terminated. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06065059
[38] Mei R, Song L. Platinum cross-resistance after first-line PARPi maintenance in ovarian cancer: a review and proposed redefinition of platinum resistance. Front Pharmacol. 2026. PMID: 42516556. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2026.1855919.
[39] Nacer DF, Veerla S, Sasiain I, et al. Comprehensive comparison of homologous recombination deficiency predictors in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2026. PMID: 42351273. DOI: 10.1186/s13058-026-02325-5.
[40] Villacampa G, Llop-Guevara A, Filmann N, et al. RAD51 Testing in Patients with Early HER2-Negative Breast Cancer and Homologous Recombination Deficiency: A Post Hoc Analysis of the GeparOLA Trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2025. PMID: 39786436. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-24-3148.
[41] Betella I, Fumagalli D, Rappa A, et al. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on homologous recombination deficiency test results in patients with advanced high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2026. PMID: 42418892. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgc.2026.104789.
[42] Kabeer F, Cochrane D, Grisdale C, et al. Interpreting homologous recombination deficiency in rare gynecological cancers: A case of primary mucinous endometrial adenocarcinoma of gastrointestinal type. Gynecol Oncol Rep. 2026. PMID: 42598072. DOI: 10.1016/j.gore.2026.102180.
[43] Criscuolo D, Merolla F, Pellegrino B, et al. CCDC6 Immunostaining in Conjunction with the Rad51 HRD Assay May Expand PARPi Treatment Eligibility in Patients with HGSOC. Cancer Res Commun. 2026. PMID: 41417832. DOI: 10.1158/2767-9764.CRC-25-0455.