Points to consider: is there evidence to support BRCA1/2 and other inherited breast cancer genetic testing for all breast cancer patients? A statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)

Genome-first evaluation with exome sequence and clinical data uncovers underdiagnosed genetic disorders in a large healthcare system

Population-based genomic screening may help diagnose individuals with disease-risk variants. Here, we perform a genome-first evaluation for nine disorders in 29,039 participants with linked exome sequences and electronic health records (EHRs). We identify 614 individuals with 303 pathogenic/likely pathogenic or predicted loss-of-function (P/LP/LoF) variants, yielding 644 observations; 487 observations (76%) lack a corresponding clinical diagnosis in the EHR. Upon further investigation, 75 clinically undiagnosed observations (15%) have evidence of symptomatic untreated disease, including familial hypercholesterolemia (3 of 6 [50%] undiagnosed observations with disease evidence) and breast cancer (23 of 106 [22%]). These genetic findings enable targeted phenotyping that reveals new diagnoses in previously undiagnosed individuals. Disease yield is greater with variants in penetrant genes for which disease is observed in carriers in an independent cohort. The prevalence of P/LP/LoF variants exceeds that of clinical diagnoses, and some clinically undiagnosed carriers are discovered to have disease. These results highlight the potential of population-based genomic screening.

Effect on Germline Mutation Rate in a High-Risk Chinese Breast Cancer Cohort after Compliance with The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) 2023 v.1 Testing Criteria

BACKGROUND

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) testing criteria for the high-penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes, specifically BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, PALB2, PTEN, and TP53, have been recently modified in 2023 to 2023 v.1. The following criteria have been changed: (1) from a person diagnosed with breast cancer at ≤45 to ≤50; (2) from aged 45-50 of personal breast diagnosis to any age of diagnosis with multiple breast cancers; and (3) from aged ≥51 of personal breast diagnosis to any age of diagnosis with family history listed in NCCN 2022 v.2.

METHODS

High-risk breast cancer patients (n = 3797) were recruited from the Hong Kong Hereditary Breast Cancer Family Registry between 2007 and 2022. Patients were grouped according to NCCN testing criteria 2023 v.1 and 2022 v.2. A 30-gene panel for hereditary breast cancer was performed. The mutation rates on high-penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes were compared.

RESULTS

About 91.2% of the patients met the 2022 v.2 criteria, while 97.5% of the patients met the 2023 v.1 criteria. An extra 6.4% of the patients were included after the revision of the criteria, and 2.5% of the patients did not meet both testing criteria. The germline BRCA1/2 mutation rates for patients meeting the 2022 v.2 and 2023 v.1 criteria were 10.1% and 9.6%, respectively. The germline mutation rates of all 6 high-penetrance genes in these two groups were 12.2% and 11.6%, respectively. Among the additional 242 patients who were included using the new selection criteria, the mutation rates were 2.1% and 2.5% for BRCA1/2 and all 6 high-penetrance genes, respectively. Patients who did not meet both testing criteria were those with multiple personal cancers, a strong family history of cancers not listed in the NCCN, unclear pathology information, or the patient's voluntary intention to be tested. The mutation rates of BRCA1/2 and the 6 high-penetrance genes in these patients were 5.3% and 6.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study provided a real-world application of the revision of NCCN guidelines and its effect on the germline mutation rate in the Chinese population. Applying the updated criteria for further genetic investigation would increase the positive detection rate, and potentially more patients would benefit. The balance between the resource and outcome requires careful consideration.

The association between age at breast cancer diagnosis and prevalence of pathogenic variants

PURPOSE

Young age at breast cancer (BC) diagnosis and family history of BC are strongly associated with high prevalence of pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. There is limited evidence for such associations with moderate/high penetrance BC-risk genes such as ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2.

METHODS

We analyzed multi-gene panel testing results (09/2013-12/2019) for women unaffected by any cancer (N = 371,594) and those affected with BC (N = 130,151) ascertained for suspicion of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer. Multivariable logistic regression was used to test association between PV status and age at BC diagnosis (≤ 45 vs. > 45 years) or family history of BC after controlling for personal/family non-BC histories and self-reported ancestry.

RESULTS

An association between young age (≤ 45 years) at diagnosis and presence of PVs was strong for BRCA1 (OR 3.95, 95% CI 3.64-4.29) and moderate for BRCA2 (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.84-2.14). Modest associations were observed between PVs and young age at diagnosis for ATM (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08-1.37) and CHEK2 (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.21-1.47) genes, but not for PALB2 (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.98-1.27). For women with BC, earliest age of familial BC diagnosis followed a similar pattern. For unaffected women, earliest age of family cancer diagnosis was significantly associated with PV status only for BRCA1 (OR 2.34, 95% CI 2.13-2.56) and BRCA2 (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.16-1.35).

CONCLUSIONS

Young age at BC diagnosis is not a strong risk factor for carrying PVs in BC-associated genes ATM, CHEK2, or PALB2.

A pilot study investigating feasibility of mainstreaming germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing in high-risk patients with breast and/or ovarian cancer in three tertiary Cancer Centres in Ireland

In the Republic of Ireland (ROI), BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic testing has been traditionally undertaken in eligible individuals, after pre-test counselling by a Clinical Geneticist/Genetic Counsellor. Clinical Genetics services in ROI are poorly resourced, with routine waiting times for appointments at the time of this pilot often extending beyond a year. The consequent prolonged waiting times are unacceptable where therapeutic decision-making depends on the patient's BRCA status. "Mainstreaming" BRCA1/BRCA2 testing through routine oncology/surgical clinics has been implemented successfully in other centres in the UK and internationally. We aimed to pilot this pathway in three Irish tertiary centres. A service evaluation project was undertaken over a 6-month period between January and July 2017. Eligible patients, fulfilling pathology and age-based inclusion criteria defined by TGL clinical, were identified, and offered constitutional BRCA1/BRCA2 testing after pre-test counselling by treating clinicians. Tests were undertaken by TGL Clinical. Results were returned to clinicians by secure email. Onward referrals of patients with uncertain/pathogenic results, or suspicious family histories, to Clinical Genetics were made by the treating team. Surveys assessing patient and clinician satisfaction were sent to participating clinicians and a sample of participating patients. Data was collected with respect to diagnostic yield, turnaround time, onward referral rates, and patient and clinician feedback. A total of 101  patients underwent diagnostic germline BRCA1/BRCA2 tests through this pathway. Pathogenic variants were identified in 12 patients (12%). All patients in whom variants were identified were appropriately referred to Clinical Genetics. At least 12 additional patients with uninformative BRCA1/BRCA2 tests were also referred for formal assessment by Clinical Geneticist or Genetic Counsellor. Issues were noted in terms of time pressures and communication of results to patients. Results from a representative sample of participants completing the satisfaction survey indicated that the pathway was acceptable to patients and clinicians. Mainstreaming of constitutional BRCA1/BRCA2 testing guided by age- and pathology-based criteria is potentially feasible for patients with breast cancer as well as patients with ovarian cancer in Ireland.

Development of a comprehensive approach to adult hereditary cancer testing in Ontario

BACKGROUND

Genetic testing for hereditary cancer susceptibility has advanced over time due to the discovery of new risk genes, improved technology and decreased cost. In the province of Ontario, testing eligibility criteria were initially developed to include hereditary breast, ovarian and colorectal cancer syndromes. The rapid evolution of genetic technologies has facilitated the ability to interrogate a large number of genes concurrently. This, coupled with new knowledge about risk genes, necessitated a coordinated approach to expanding the scope of genes and indications tested and synchronisation of access and test utilisation across the province as required in a publicly funded universal healthcare system.

METHODS

Ontario Health-Cancer Care Ontario convened expert working groups to develop a standardised and comprehensive cancer gene list for adults and accompanying hereditary cancer testing (HCT) criteria using an evidence-based framework and broad laboratory and clinical genetics engagement.

RESULTS

A standardised 76-cancer-gene panel, organised into 13 larger disease site panels and 25 single/small gene panels, was developed and endorsed by the working groups. Provincial genetic testing eligibility criteria were updated to align with the new panels and to guide clinical decision-making. In the first year following the implementation of these changes, 10 564 HCT panels were performed with an overall mutation detection rate of 12.2%.

CONCLUSION

Using an evidence framework and broad clinical engagement to develop and endorse an updated guidance document, cancer genetic testing for adults in Ontario is now standardised and coordinated across the province.

Cost-Effectiveness of Genetic Testing for All Women Diagnosed with Breast Cancer in China

Simple Summary

Unselected multigene testing at breast cancer (BC) diagnosis has been reported to be cost-effective compared with family history (FH)/clinical-criteria-based testing in high-income countries such as the US and UK. Chinese patients are younger than Caucasian women at diagnosis, tending to have a higher gene mutation prevalence, and the family size and number of female relatives are smaller due to the one-child policy (which has been changed) in China. Therefore, offering genetic testing for BC patients could potentially prevent more cancer cases and deaths in China. However, the health economic evidence for multigene testing at BC diagnosis in China is lacking. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of three genetic testing strategies among BC patients using a microsimulation model at the individual level in China. We found that offering unselected multigene testing to all BC patients in China is highly cost-effective compared with FH/clinical-criteria-based testing or no testing from both the societal and payer perspectives.

Abstract

Unselected multigene testing for all women with breast cancer (BC) identifies more cancer susceptibility gene (CSG) carriers who can benefit from precision prevention compared with family history (FH)/clinical-criteria-based guidelines. Very little CSG testing is undertaken in middle-income countries such as China, and its cost-effectiveness remains unaddressed. We aimed to estimate cost-effectiveness and population impact of multigene testing for all Chinese BC patients. Data from 8085 unselected BC patients recruited to a Peking University Cancer Hospital study were used for microsimulation modeling, comparing three strategies in the Chinese setting: all BC women undergo BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 genetic testing, only BC women fulfilling FH/clinical criteria undergo BRCA testing, and no genetic testing. Prophylactic mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy would be adopted where appropriate. Societal and payer perspectives with a lifetime horizon along with sensitivity analyses were presented. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER): incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained is compared to the USD 10,260/QALY (one-times GDP per capita) willingness-to-pay threshold. BC incidence, ovarian cancer (OC) incidence, and related deaths were also estimated. FH/clinical-criteria-based BRCA testing was ruled out on the principle of extensive dominance. Compared with no genetic testing, multigene testing for all BC patients had an ICER = USD 4506/QALY (societal perspective) and USD 7266/QALY (payer perspective), well below our threshold. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed unselected multigene testing remained cost-effective for 94.2%/86.6% of simulations from the societal and payer perspectives. One year’s unselected multigene testing could prevent 7868 BC/OC cases and 5164 BC/OC deaths in China. Therefore, unselected multigene testing is extremely cost-effective and should be offered to all Chinese women with BC.

Do current family history-based genetic testing guidelines contribute to breast cancer health inequities?

Prior to the recommended age for population-based breast cancer screening by mammography, which ranges from 40−50 years depending on guidelines, the main way to identify higher risk women for earlier breast cancer (BC) screening to improve outcomes and discuss targeted chemoprevention is through specific clinical guidelines which are largely based on family history of breast cancer and known mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes. The annual percent change (APC) in early-onset BC continues to rise, with the higher early-onset cancer burden and mortality continuing to be seen in non-Hispanic black (NHB) women compared to non-Hispanic white (NHW) women. Coupled with the increasing incidence overall as well as the lower percent of BC family history reported in NHB women compared with that of NHW women means that continued reliance on guidelines to identify women for genetic screening and initiation of early BC screening based largely on family history could lead to even greater BC health inequities. The similarity in the prevalence of mutations in key BC susceptibility genes between NHB and NHW women contrasts sharply to the differences in age-specific incidence rates between NHB and NHW women, supporting that there must be environmental modifiers that are contributing to the increased incidence in NHB women. This reality further argues for identifying NHB women early in adulthood through genetic testing who may benefit from tailored BC risk-reduction programs and early BC screening.

Therapeutic implications of germline vulnerabilities in DNA repair for precision oncology

DNA repair vulnerabilities are present in a significant proportion of cancers. Specifically, germline alterations in DNA repair not only increase cancer risk but are associated with treatment response and clinical outcomes. The therapeutic landscape of cancer has rapidly evolved with the FDA approval of therapies that specifically target DNA repair vulnerabilities. The clinical success of synthetic lethality between BRCA deficiency and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition has been truly revolutionary. Defective mismatch repair has been validated as a predictor of response to immune checkpoint blockade associated with durable responses and long-term benefit in many cancer patients. Advances in next generation sequencing technologies and their decreasing cost have supported increased genetic profiling of tumors coupled with germline testing of cancer risk genes in patients. The clinical adoption of panel testing for germline assessment in high-risk individuals has generated a plethora of genetic data, particularly on DNA repair genes. Here, we highlight the therapeutic relevance of germline aberrations in DNA repair to identify patients eligible for precision treatments such as PARP inhibitors (PARPis), immune checkpoint blockade, chemotherapy, radiation therapy and combined treatment. We also discuss emerging mechanisms that regulate DNA repair.

Real-world multi-country study of BRCA1/2 mutation testing among adult women with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer

Aim: We assessed real-world patient demographics and BRCA1/2 mutation testing rates among adult women with HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC). Methods: Oncologists across the USA and in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK provided medical chart data in 2015 and 2017. Results: Overall, 28% of patients received BRCA1/2 mutation testing. Untested patients were more likely to be aged ≥45 years, have hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative ABC and have no known family history of breast/ovarian cancer. BRCA1/2 mutation testing rates were significantly lower in the European countries, women aged ≥45 years, women without a known family history of breast/ovarian cancer, and women with hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative ABC versus advanced triple-negative breast cancer. Conclusion: BRCA1/2 mutation testing rates were low, and disparities were observed in patient characteristics among BRCA1/2 mutation-tested versus untested patients.

Germline Pathogenic Variants in Cancer Predisposition Genes Among Women With Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast

PURPOSE

To determine the contribution of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in hereditary cancer testing panel genes to invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included 2,999 women with ILC from a population-based cohort and 3,796 women with ILC undergoing clinical multigene panel testing (clinical cohort). Frequencies of germline PVs in breast cancer predisposition genes (ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CHEK2, PALB2, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53) were compared between women with ILC and unaffected female controls and between women with ILC and infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC).

RESULTS

The frequency of PVs in breast cancer predisposition genes among women with ILC was 6.5% in the clinical cohort and 5.2% in the population-based cohort. In case-control analysis, CDH1 and BRCA2 PVs were associated with high risks of ILC (odds ratio [OR] > 4) and CHEK2, ATM, and PALB2 PVs were associated with moderate (OR = 2-4) risks. BRCA1 PVs and CHEK2 p.Ile157Thr were not associated with clinically relevant risks (OR < 2) of ILC. Compared with IDC, CDH1 PVs were > 10-fold enriched, whereas PVs in BRCA1 were substantially reduced in ILC.

CONCLUSION

The study establishes that PVs in ATM, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2, and PALB2 are associated with an increased risk of ILC, whereas BRCA1 PVs are not. The similar overall PV frequencies for ILC and IDC suggest that cancer histology should not influence the decision to proceed with genetic testing. Similar to IDC, multigene panel testing may be appropriate for women with ILC, but CDH1 should be specifically discussed because of low prevalence and gastric cancer risk.

Breast Cancer Prevention: Time for Change

Agency breast cancer prevention guidelines for other than hereditary cancers have not materially changed in 20 years; endocrine-targeted agents (then, tamoxifen; now, adding raloxifene and aromatase inhibitors) reduce good prognosis estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, progesterone receptor (PR)-positive cancers without reducing deaths from breast cancer. Across three tamoxifen placebo-controlled prevention trials (N = 23,360) begun almost 30 years ago, although there were 226 fewer breast cancer cases, there were nine more deaths from breast cancer in the tamoxifen groups. Following clinical advances, currently more than half of breast cancer cases are solved problems with extremely low risk of death. As endocrine-targeted agents commonly prevent these cancers, widespread implementation of current prevention strategies may not reduce deaths from breast cancer. Compared with other breast cancers, ER-positive, PR-negative cancers and triple-negative cancers have inferior survival (90.6% v 83.8% v 78.1%, respectively; P < .001). Against this background, in the Women's Health Initiative Dietary Modification randomized trial (N = 48,835), ER-positive, PR-negative cancers were statistically significantly reduced in the intervention group (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.94) and deaths from breast cancer were reduced 21% (P = .02). In the Women's Health Initiative randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating conjugated equine estrogen (N = 10,739), ER-positive, PR-negative cancers were statistically significantly reduced in the intervention group (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.74) and deaths from breast cancer were reduced 40% (P = .04). These findings suggest that reexamination of breast cancer risk reduction strategies and clinical practice is needed.

Disparities in Genetic Testing for Heritable Solid-Tumor Malignancies

Genetic testing offers providers a potentially life saving tool for identifying and intervening in high-risk individuals. However, disparities in receipt of genetic testing have been consistently demonstrated and undoubtedly have significant implications for the populations not receiving the standard of care. If correctly used, there is the potential for genetic testing to play a role in decreasing health disparities among individuals of different races and ethnicities. However, if genetic testing continues to revolutionize cancer care while being disproportionately distributed, it also has the potential to widen the existing mortality gap between various racial and ethnic populations.

Genetic testing in patients with triple-negative or hereditary breast cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In recent years there has been a dramatic evolution in the clinical utility of genetic testing with expanding therapeutic implications for individuals with breast cancer who harbor a germline mutation in BRCA1/2. As these therapeutic opportunities expand and evolve, this requires the clinical and research community to rethink the approach to genetic testing for individuals with breast cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Genetic testing is evolving from traditional testing models based on pretest counseling with the aim of identifying hereditary and individual risk for purposes of screening and risk reduction to contemporary models that utilize technology to improve accessibility and oncology led mainstreaming of testing where the oncologist refers for genetic testing, discloses the results and formal counseling occurs later in the process than in traditional models. The cost and accessibility to multigene panel testing have resulted in broad uptake despite the fact that clinical utility and appropriate interpretation of results are not yet well established. Furthermore, somatic testing for genomic alterations may also yield results beyond the disease with detection of germline mutations impacting the individual and their family more broadly than anticipated.

SUMMARY

With the establishment of poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors as part of the treatment armamentarium for early and advanced breast cancer, paradigms, algorithms, and resources for genetic testing need to rapidly change in order to adapt to the evolution of germline mutations from hereditary and individual risk predictors to predictive therapeutic biomarkers.

Defining the role of pharmacists in medication-related genetic counseling

There is little question that precision medicine will eventually be the standard of care in treatment with algorithms designed for therapy selection and is already being used in some specialties such as cystic fibrosis and multiple cancer treatments. Genetic counselors are the heart of the treatment team in relation to counseling regarding genetic risk factors and disease states. A framework for treatment within the interdisciplinary team with more defined roles and areas of specialty will need to be in place as this practice approach expands with new data and treatments. Pharmacists are poised to be of great assistance in this matrix as many of these roles are merely an extension of current tasks and responsibilities of pharmacy practice.

Value of a genetics clinic evaluation in identifying women at risk for hereditary breast-ovarian cancer syndrome

Our work evaluates the contributions of a genetics clinic visit in assessing patients' risk of hereditary cancers and in meeting National Cancer Comprehensive Network (NCCN) criteria for genetic testing. We reviewed the electronic health records (EHR) of 56 women seen for medical care in our healthcare system who were subsequently seen in the Adult Genetics Clinic. We searched for all personal or family cancer history available in either free-text or structured form within the EHR prior to the genetics visit. For each patient, we then compared the aggregate data with the pedigree information obtained at the Genetics Clinic visit for first-, second-, and third-degree relatives. During the genetics clinic visit, the number of relatives with cancer diagnoses doubled from 121 to 235, and for 17 of 56 (30%) of patients, family histories changed one or more NCCN criteria. For 39/56 (70%) of patients, the family history in the EHR was not changed during the genetics clinic visit. Of 56 women referred to the genetics clinic, 45 (80%) met NCCN guidelines for testing, 40 women underwent genetic testing, and 9 of 40 (23%) tested were positive for a Likely Pathogenic or Pathogenic (LP/P) variant. This study of 56 women quantitatively demonstrates the value of a genetics clinic visit by improved identification of key family history components.

Prevalence of germline variants in consensus moderate-to-high-risk predisposition genes to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2-negative Brazilian patients

PURPOSE

This study aimed to identify and classify genetic variants in consensus moderate-to-high-risk predisposition genes associated with Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome (HBOC), in BRCA1/2-negative patients from Brazil.

METHODS

The study comprised 126 index patients who met NCCN clinical criteria and tested negative for all coding exons and intronic flanking regions of BRCA1/2 genes. Multiplex PCR-based assays were designed to cover the complete coding regions and flanking splicing sites of six genes implicated in HBOC. Sequencing was performed on HiSeq2500 Genome Analyzer.

RESULTS

Overall, we identified 488 unique variants. We identified five patients (3.97%) that harbored pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in four genes: ATM (1), CHEK2 (2), PALB2 (1), and TP53 (1). One hundred and thirty variants were classified as variants of uncertain significance (VUS), 10 of which were predicted to disrupt mRNA splicing (seven non-coding variants and three coding variants), while other six missense VUS were classified as probably damaging by prediction algorithms.

CONCLUSION

A detailed mutational profile of non-BRCA genes is still being described in Brazil. In this study, we contributed to filling this gap, by providing important data on the diversity of genetic variants in a Brazilian high-risk patient cohort. ATM, CHEK2, PALB2 and TP53 are well established as HBOC predisposition genes, and the identification of deleterious variants in such actionable genes contributes to clinical management of probands and relatives.

Rapid Genetic Testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations at the Time of Breast Cancer Diagnosis: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of rapid genetic testing (RGT) for BRCA1 and BRCA2 at the time of breast cancer diagnosis on treatment choices. Bilateral mastectomy for the treatment of breast cancer in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation offers a reduction in the risk of contralateral breast cancer. It is unclear whether offering RGT at the time of breast cancer diagnosis has an impact on women's surgical decision-making.

METHODS

Women with breast cancer diagnosed between June 2013 and May 2018 were recruited from four academic health sciences centers in Toronto, Canada. The participants completed a questionnaire before genetic testing, then one week and one year after disclosure of the genetic test result. Before surgery, RGT was performed. Diagnostic, pathologic, and treatment data were compared between those with and those without a BRCA mutation.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 1007 women who consented to RGT. The mean age of the participants was 46.3 years, and the median time to result disclosure was 10 days. A BRCA mutation was found in 6% of the women. The women with a BRCA mutation were significantly more likely to elect for bilateral mastectomy than the women without a BRCA mutation (p < 0.0001). Of the BRCA-positive patients, 95.7% reported that they used their genetic test result to make a surgical decision.

CONCLUSIONS

The women provided with RGT at the time of breast cancer diagnosis use the genetic information to make treatment decisions, and the majority of those identified with a BRCA mutation elect for a bilateral mastectomy.

Germline pathogenic variant spectrum in 25 cancer susceptibility genes in Turkish breast and colorectal cancer patients and elderly controls

Inherited pathogenic variants account for 5% to 10% of all breast cancer (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) cases. Here, we sought to profile the pathogenic variants in 25 cancer susceptibility genes in Turkish population. Germline pathogenic variants were screened in 732 BC patients, 189 CRC patients and 490 cancer-free elderly controls, using next-generation sequencing-based multigene panel testing and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification testing. Pathogenic variants were detected in 17.2% of high-risk BC patients and 26.4% of high-risk CRC patients. More than 95% of these variants were clinically actionable. BRCA1/2 and mismatch repair genes (MLH1, MSH2 and MSH6) accounted for two-thirds of all pathogenic variants detected in high-risk BC and CRC patients, respectively. Pathogenic variants in PALB2, CHEK2, ATM and TP53 were also prevalent in high-risk BC patients (4.5%). BRCA1 exons 17-18 deletion and CHEK2 c.592+3A>T were the most common variants predisposing to BC, and they are likely to be founder variants. Three frequent MUTYH pathogenic variants (c.884C>T, c.1437_1439delGGA and c.1187G>A) were responsible for all MUTYH biallelic cases (4.4% of high-risk CRC patients). The total pathogenic variant frequency was very low in controls (2.4%) and in low-risk BC (3.9%) and CRC (6.1%) patients. Our study depicts the pathogenic variant spectrum and prevalence in Turkish BC and CRC patients, guiding clinicians and health authorities for genetic testing applications and variant classification in Turkish population.

Literature Review of BARD1 as a Cancer Predisposing Gene with a Focus on Breast and Ovarian Cancers

Soon after the discovery of BRCA1 and BRCA2 over 20 years ago, it became apparent that not all hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer syndrome families were explained by germline variants in these cancer predisposing genes, suggesting that other such genes have yet to be discovered. BRCA1-associated ring domain (BARD1), a direct interacting partner of BRCA1, was one of the earliest candidates investigated. Sequencing analyses revealed that potentially pathogenic BARD1 variants likely conferred a low-moderate risk to hereditary breast cancer, but this association is inconsistent. Here, we review studies of BARD1 as a cancer predisposing gene and illustrate the challenge of discovering additional cancer risk genes for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer. We selected peer reviewed research articles that focused on three themes: (i) sequence analyses of BARD1 to identify potentially pathogenic germline variants in adult hereditary cancer syndromes; (ii) biological assays of BARD1 variants to assess their effect on protein function; and (iii) association studies of BARD1 variants in family-based and case-control study groups to assess cancer risk. In conclusion, BARD1 is likely to be a low-moderate penetrance breast cancer risk gene.

Evaluation of Germline Genetic Testing Criteria in a Hospital-Based Series of Women With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

To determine the sensitivity and specificity of genetic testing criteria for the detection of germline pathogenic variants in women with breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Women with breast cancer enrolled in a breast cancer registry at a tertiary cancer center between 2000 and 2016 were evaluated for germline pathogenic variants in 9 breast cancer predisposition genes (ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2, NF1, PALB2, PTEN, and TP53). The performance of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) hereditary cancer testing criteria was evaluated relative to testing of all women as recommended by the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

RESULTS

Of 3,907 women, 1,872 (47.9%) meeting NCCN criteria were more likely to carry a pathogenic variant in 9 predisposition genes compared with women not meeting criteria (9.0% v 3.5%; P < .001). Of those not meeting criteria (n = 2,035), 14 (0.7%) had pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2. The sensitivity of NCCN criteria was 70% for 9 predisposition genes and 87% for BRCA1 and BRCA2, with a specificity of 53%. Expansion of the NCCN criteria to include all women diagnosed with breast cancer at ≤ 65 years of age achieved > 90% sensitivity for the 9 predisposition genes and > 98% sensitivity for BRCA1 and BRCA2.

CONCLUSION

A substantial proportion of women with breast cancer carrying germline pathogenic variants in predisposition genes do not qualify for testing by NCCN criteria. Expansion of NCCN criteria to include all women diagnosed at ≤ 65 years of age improves the sensitivity of the selection criteria without requiring testing of all women with breast cancer.