Universal screening for Lynch syndrome in uterine cancer patients: A quality improvement initiative

Universal screening for Lynch syndrome in endometrial cancer diagnoses in Auckland, New Zealand: The initial experience

BACKGROUND

Universal mismatch repair immunohistochemistry (MMR IHC) tumour testing in endometrial cancer (EC) for Lynch syndrome (LS) was introduced in Auckland, New Zealand, in January 2017. Identifying patients with LS allows them and their families to access risk reduction strategies. Universal MMR IHC testing aids in the molecular classification of EC and has prognostic and therapeutic implications.

AIM

We aimed to determine the incidence of LS in women with EC in Auckland, New Zealand, following the introduction of MMR testing and the impact of universal screening on local genetic services.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective clinicopathological evaluation of women with a new EC diagnosis referred to the Auckland Gynaecological Oncology Unit from 1/1/17 to 31/12/18. Patient data were extracted from the Gynaecological Oncology Unit database and electronic records, and analysed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

During the study period, 409 patients were diagnosed with EC, with an over-representation of Pacific Islanders (32.5%). Of these, 82.6% underwent MMR IHC testing, 20% were MMR-deficient (MMRd), and 71% had somatic hypermethylation. The Pacific Islander population had a 64% (odds ratio 0.36, P = 0.005) reduction in the odds of having MMRd tumours compared with Europeans. Of the patients who underwent MMR IHC testing, 5.5% were referred to a genetic clinic for germline testing. LS was confirmed in eight patients (2.3%).

CONCLUSION

LS was diagnosed in 2.3% of patients. There was an over-representation of Pacific Islanders in the EC group but not among those diagnosed with LS.

Differential Receipt of Genetic Services Among Patients With Gynecologic Cancer and Their Relatives: A Review of Challenges to Health Equity

Up to 14% of endometrial cancers and 23% of epithelial ovarian cancers are associated with genetic predispositions. Referral for genetic testing and counseling can significantly impact a patient's oncologic outcomes. However, significant disparities in genetic referral and testing exist within medically underserved and minority populations in the United States. These disparities in care and access to care are multifactorial, often involving patient-level, health care-level, and system-level factors. In this review, we focus on disparities in genetic testing among patients with ovarian and uterine cancer, and the missed opportunities for primary cancer prevention among their relatives.

Delivery of hereditary cancer genetics services to patients newly diagnosed with ovarian and endometrial cancers at three gynecologic oncology clinics in the USA, Brazil, and Mexico

OBJECTIVE

Three gynecologic oncology clinics located in the USA, Brazil, and Mexico collaborated to evaluate their delivery of hereditary cancer genetics services. This descriptive retrospective review study aimed to establish baseline rates and timeliness of guideline-recommended genetics service delivery to patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, primary peritoneal (ovarian), and endometrial cancers at each clinic.

METHODS

Patients who were newly diagnosed with ovarian and endometrial cancers between September 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020 were identified from the medical records of the clinics. Genetics service delivery metrics included the rates of mismatch repair deficiency tumor testing for patients with endometrial cancer (microsatellite instability/immunohistochemistry, MSI/IHC), referral to genetics services for patients with ovarian cancer, completed genetics consultations, and germline genetic testing for patients with ovarian and endometrial cancers. Timeliness was calculated as the average number of days between diagnosis and the relevant delivery metric. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze data.

RESULTS

In total, 1195 patients (596 with ovarian cancer, 599 with endometrial cancer) were included in the analysis, and rates of genetics service delivery varied by clinic. For patients with ovarian cancer, referral rates ranged by clinic from 32.6% to 89.5%; 30.4-65.1% of patients completed genetics consultation and 32.6-68.7% completed genetic testing. The timeliness to genetic testing for patients with ovarian cancer ranged by clinic from 107 to 595 days. A smaller proportion of patients with endometrial cancer completed MSI/IHC testing (10.0-69.2%), with the average time to MSI/IHC ranging from 15 to 282 days. Rates of genetics consultation among patients with endometrial cancer ranged by clinic from 10.8% to 26.0% and 12.5-16.6% completed genetic testing.

CONCLUSIONS

All clinics successfully established baseline rates and timeliness of delivering hereditary cancer genetics services to patients with ovarian and endometrial cancers. Lower rates of delivering genetics services to patients with endometrial cancer warrant additional research and quality improvement efforts.

Mismatch Repair Deficiency as a Predictive and Prognostic Biomarker in Endometrial Cancer: A Review on Immunohistochemistry Staining Patterns and Clinical Implications

Among the four endometrial cancer (EC) TCGA molecular groups, the MSI/hypermutated group represents an important percentage of tumors (30%), including different histotypes, and generally confers an intermediate prognosis for affected women, also providing new immunotherapeutic strategies. Immunohistochemistry for MMR proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2) has become the optimal diagnostic MSI surrogate worldwide. This review aims to provide state-of-the-art knowledge on MMR deficiency/MSI in EC and to clarify the pathological assessment, interpretation pitfalls and reporting of MMR status.

Outcomes for Dostarlimab and Real-World Treatments in Post-platinum Patients With Advanced/Recurrent Endometrial Cancer: The GARNET Trial Versus a US Electronic Health Record-Based External Control Arm

Background: Patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (EC) have limited treatment options following platinum-based chemotherapy and poor prognosis. The single-arm, Phase I GARNET trial (NCT02715284) previously reported dostarlimab efficacy in mismatch repair-deficient/microsatellite instability-high advanced or recurrent EC. Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare overall survival (OS) and describe time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) for dostarlimab (GARNET Cohort A1 safety population) with an equivalent real-world external control arm receiving non-anti-programmed death (PD)-1/PD-ligand (L)1/2 treatments (constructed using data from a nationwide electronic health record-derived de-identified database and applied GARNET eligibility criteria). Methods: Propensity scores constructed from prognostic factors, identified by literature review and clinical experts, were used for inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed and OS/TTD was estimated (Cox regression model was used to estimate the OS-adjusted hazard ratio). Results: Dostarlimab was associated with a 52% lower risk of death vs real-world treatments (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-0.66). IPTW-adjusted median OS for dostarlimab (N=143) was not estimable (95% CI, 19.4-not estimable) versus 13.1 months (95% CI, 8.3-15.9) for real-world treatments (N = 185). Median TTD was 11.7 months (95% CI, 6.0-38.7) for dostarlimab and 5.3 months (95% CI, 4.1-6.0) for the real-world cohort. Discussion: Consistent with previous analyses, patients treated with dostarlimab had significantly longer OS than patients in the US real-world cohort after adjusting for the lack of randomization using stabilized IPTW. Additionally, patients had a long TTD when treated with dostarlimab, suggesting a favorable tolerability profile. Conclusion: Patients with advanced or recurrent EC receiving dostarlimab in GARNET had significantly lower risk of death than those receiving real-world non-anti-PD-(L)1/2 treatments.

Incidence and Survival of Multiple Primary Cancers in US Women With a Gynecologic Cancer

Objectives

To evaluate risk of a second cancer and associated survival times in United States women with diagnosis of cancer.

Methods

The Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database was queried for 2 cohorts of women aged 18 - 89 with either an index gynecologic or non-gynecologic cancer diagnosed between 1992 - 2017. Index cases were followed to determine if a second primary cancer was subsequently diagnosed; defined according to SEER multiple primary and histology coding rules. Standard Incident Ratios (SIR) and latency intervals between index diagnosis and second primary diagnosis were evaluated. Among those who developed a second primary cancer, median survival times from diagnosis of second primary cancer were also calculated.

Results

Between 1992 - 2017, 227,313 US women were diagnosed with an index gynecological cancer and 1,483,016 were diagnosed with an index non-gynecologic cancer. Among patients with index gynecologic cancer, 7.78% developed a non-gynecologic subsequent primary cancer. The risk of developing any non-gynecologic cancer following an index gynecologic cancer was higher than the risk in the general population (SIR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04 - 1.07). Organs especially at risk were Thyroid (SIR 1.45), Colon and Rectum (SIR 1.23), and Urinary System (SIR 1.33). Among women diagnosed with an index non-gynecologic cancer, 0.99% were diagnosed with a subsequent gynecologic cancer. The risk of developing a gynecologic cancer following a non-gynecologic cancer was also elevated compared to the average risk of the general population (SIR 1.05, 1.03 - 1.07), with uterine cancer having the highest SIR of 1.13.

Conclusion

The risk of a developing a second primary cancer and the corresponding survival time is based on the order and site of the index and subsequent cancer. Surveillance guidelines should be examined further to optimize survivorship programs.

Screening of Lynch syndrome in endometrial cancer in Iranian population with mismatch repair protein by immunohistochemistry

Background

Lynch syndrome (LS) is one of the commonest genetic cancer syndromes, with an incidence rate of 1 per 250-1000 population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency and characteristics of MMR deficiency in endometrial cancer in Iranian women.

Methods

One hundred endometrial carcinoma cases who referred to the gynecological oncology clinic of Imam Hossein Medical Center located in Tehran, Iran, from 2018 to 2020 were included in the study. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) evaluation was performed mainly on the hysterectomy specimens of all endometrial cancer (EC) patients to assess MMR proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2) expression.

Results

A total of 23 out of 100 (23%) cases were identified through IHC screening to be MMR-deficient. The most common types were loss of MLH1/PMS2 (17.4%) and solitary MSH2 (17.4%) expressions followed by PMS2/MSH2 loss (13%). MMR deficiency (dMMR) histopathology was significantly overrepresented in patients with family history of cancer or Lynch syndrome (LS) associated cancers (p-values of 0.016 and 0.005, respectively). The rate of myometrial invasion and lower uterine segment involvement were also significantly higher in dMMR EC patients compared to MMR-intact EC (p-value of 0.021 and 0.018, respectively).

Conclusion

MMR deficiency, observed in 23% of endometrial cancer cases, was associated with higher rates of poor prognostic factors including myometrial invasion and lower uterine segment involvement. The presence of positive family history of cancer and family history of LS-associated cancer increased the probability of MMR-deficiency in endometrioid endometrial cancer to 47% and 70%, respectively.

The design, implementation, and effectiveness of intervention strategies aimed at improving genetic referral practices: a systematic review of the literature

Purpose

Despite rapid advancements in genetics and genomics, referral practices remain suboptimal. This systematic review assesses the extent to which approaches from implementation science have been applied to address suboptimal genetic referral practices.

Methods

A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO generated 7,794 articles, of which 28 were included. Lay barriers were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and interventions mapped to behavior change techniques. Use of implementation and behavior change frameworks was assessed, and the Theory and Techniques Tool used to determine theoretical alignment.

Results

Knowledge was the most frequent retrospectively TDF-coded barrier, followed by environmental context and resources, and skills. Significant referral improvements occurred in 56% of studies. Among these, the most frequent interventions were clinical data review systems, family history collection and referral tools, and embedding genetics staff into nongenetic specialties. Few studies used implementation frameworks or reported implementation outcomes, though some deployed intuitive strategies that aligned with theory.

Conclusion

Genetic referral interventions are rarely informed by implementation and/or behavior change theories, limiting opportunities for learning across contexts. Retrospective coding has provided a suite of theoretically linked strategies, which may be useful for informing future efforts. Incorporating these strategies into clinical guidelines may facilitate operationalization within the system.