Consensus for genes to be included on cancer panel tests offered by UK genetics services: guidelines of the UK Cancer Genetics Group

Selection of Germline Genetic Testing Panels in Patients With Cancer: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To guide use of multigene panels for germline genetic testing for patients with cancer.

METHODS

An ASCO Expert Panel convened to develop recommendations on the basis of a systematic review of guidelines, consensus statements, and studies of germline and somatic genetic testing.

RESULTS

Fifty-two guidelines and consensus statements met eligibility criteria for the primary search; 14 studies were identified for Clinical Question 4.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Patients should have a family history taken and recorded that includes details of cancers in first- and second-degree relatives and the patient's ethnicity. When more than one gene is relevant based on personal and/or family history, multigene panel testing should be offered. When considering what genes to include in the panel, the minimal panel should include the more strongly recommended genes from Table 1 and may include those less strongly recommended. A broader panel may be ordered when the potential benefits are clearly identified, and the potential harms from uncertain results should be mitigated. Patients who meet criteria for germline genetic testing should be offered germline testing regardless of results from tumor testing. Patients who would not normally be offered germline genetic testing based on personal and/or family history criteria but who have a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant identified by tumor testing in a gene listed in Table 2 under the outlined circumstances should be offered germline testing.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/molecular-testing-and-biomarkers-guidelines.

EMQN best practice guidelines for genetic testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) is a genetic condition associated with increased risk of cancers. The past decade has brought about significant changes to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) diagnostic testing with new treatments, testing methods and strategies, and evolving information on genetic associations. These best practice guidelines have been produced to assist clinical laboratories in effectively addressing the complexities of HBOC testing, while taking into account advancements since the last guidelines were published in 2007. These guidelines summarise cancer risk data from recent studies for the most commonly tested high and moderate risk HBOC genes for laboratories to refer to as a guide. Furthermore, recommendations are provided for somatic and germline testing services with regards to clinical referral, laboratory analyses, variant interpretation, and reporting. The guidelines present recommendations where 'must' is assigned to advocate that the recommendation is essential; and 'should' is assigned to advocate that the recommendation is highly advised but may not be universally applicable. Recommendations are presented in the form of shaded italicised statements throughout the document, and in the form of a table in supplementary materials (Table S4). Finally, for the purposes of encouraging standardisation and aiding implementation of recommendations, example report wording covering the essential points to be included is provided for the most common HBOC referral and reporting scenarios. These guidelines are aimed primarily at genomic scientists working in diagnostic testing laboratories.

Whole exome sequencing of a novel homozygous missense variant in PALB2 gene leading to Fanconi anaemia complementation group

Partner and localiser of BRCA2 (PALB2), also known as FANCN, is a key tumour suppressor gene in maintaining genome integrity. Monoallelic mutations of PALB2 are associated with breast and overian cancers, while bi-allelic mutations cause Fanconi anaemia (FA). In the present study, whole exome sequencing (WES) identified a novel homozygous missense variant, NM_024675.3: c.3296C>G (p.Thr1099Arg) in PALB2 gene (OMIM: 610355) that caused FA with mild pulmonary valve stenosis and dysmorphic and atypical features, including lymphangiectasia, non-immune hydrops fetalis and right-sided pleural effusion in a preterm female baby. WES results were further validated by Sanger sequencing. WES improves the screening and detection of novel and causative genetic variants to improve management of disease. To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first reported FA case in a Saudi family with phenotypic atypical FA features. The results support the role of PALB2 gene and pathogenic variants that may cause clinical presentation of FA. Furthermore, the present results may establish a disease database, providing a groundwork for understanding the key genomic regions to control diseases resulting from consanguinity.

miR-125 in Breast Cancer Etiopathogenesis: An Emerging Role as a Biomarker in Differential Diagnosis, Regenerative Medicine, and the Challenges of Personalized Medicine

Breast Cancer (BC) is one of the most common cancer types worldwide, and it is characterized by a complex etiopathogenesis, resulting in an equally complex classification of subtypes. MicroRNA (miRNA or miR) are small non-coding RNA molecules that have an essential role in gene expression and are significantly linked to tumor development and angiogenesis in different types of cancer. Recently, complex interactions among coding and non-coding RNA have been elucidated, further shedding light on the complexity of the roles these molecules fulfill in cancer formation. In this context, knowledge about the role of miR in BC has significantly improved, highlighting the deregulation of these molecules as additional factors influencing BC occurrence, development and classification. A considerable number of papers has been published over the past few years regarding the role of miR-125 in human pathology in general and in several types of cancer formation in particular. Interestingly, miR-125 family members have been recently linked to BC formation as well, and complex interactions (competing endogenous RNA networks, or ceRNET) between this molecule and target mRNA have been described. In this review, we summarize the state-of-the-art about research on this topic.

The Diagnostic Yield of Genetic Testing in Patients With Multiple Colorectal Adenomas: A Specialist Center Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Adenoma multiplicity is associated with increased colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. The utility of genetic testing in patients with multiple colorectal adenomas (MCRA) remains uncertain. We evaluated the diagnostic yield of mutations in polyposis- and CRC-associated genes in patients with MCRA.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional review of adult patients with 10-99 cumulative adenomas from the prospective database at the St Mark's Hospital Polyposis Registry and Family Cancer Clinic between 1999 and 2021. Genetic testing was performed for adenomatous polyposis-associated genes, hamartomatous polyposis-associated genes, and nonpolyposis colorectal cancer-associated genes. Clinicopathological outcomes were extracted for multiple logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-nine patients with MCRA (median age 61 [interquartile range 53-69] years) were identified. Sixty-six patients (25.5%) had a pathogenic variant or likely pathogenic variant, with APC and biallelic MUTYH mutations constituting the majority of identified pathogenic variant/likely pathogenic variants. Diagnostic yields were greater than 10% at any adenoma burden. In univariate analysis, higher adenoma burden and younger age were associated with higher yield (both P < 0.0001). In patients with MCRA with 10-19 adenomas without a relevant personal or family history of CRC, the diagnostic yield was nil. In multiple logistic regression analysis, higher adenoma burden, younger age, personal history of CRC, and first-degree familial history of CRC were associated with higher diagnostic yield.

DISCUSSION

Diagnostic yield of >10% at any adenoma burden supports current guidance for constitutional genetic testing in patients with MCRA, although the low yield in people older than 60 years with 10-19 adenomas suggests that a stratified approach might be appropriate.

Current status and perspectives of genetic testing in gastrointestinal cancer (Review)

Genetic testing has become widespread in daily medical care for gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. However, unlike breast cancer and non-small cell lung cancer, in which personalized medicine targeting various driver genes is standardized, the incidence of targeted gene abnormalities in GI cancers is low. Nevertheless, such abnormalities may be linked to therapeutic agents and the further development of therapeutic agents for personalized medicine for GI cancers is desired. A liquid biopsy is of great benefit in offering clinical decision support, in applications such as GI cancer screening, surgical interventions, monitoring disease status and enhancing patient survival outcomes, all of which would contribute to personalized medicine. Germline genetic testing is required for several types of GI cancer, which shows clinical indications of hereditary predisposition. The increasing use of multigene panel testing has redefined gene-cancer associations, and consequently the estimate of cancer risk that vary from low to high penetrance. Comprehensive genetic testing can enable the detection of novel treatment targets and the discovery of undefined multiple diagnostic/predictive markers, which may enhance the molecular-level understanding of GI cancers. Genetic testing can also aid the design of more appropriate and adequate genomic-driven therapies for patients who may benefit from other standardized therapeutic methods.

Genetic predisposition to gastrointestinal polyposis: syndromes, tumour features, genetic testing, and clinical management

Gastrointestinal tract polyposis is characterised by the presence of multiple polyps, particularly in the colorectum, and encompasses both cancer predisposition genetic syndromes and non-syndromic clinical manifestations. The sources of the heterogeneity observed in polyposis syndromes relate to genetic cause, mode of inheritance, polyp burden and histological type, and spectrum and frequency of extracolonic manifestations. These features determine the clinical management of carriers, including strategies for cancer prevention and early detection, and oncological treatments. Despite substantial progress in identifying the genetic causes of polyposis, a large proportion of cases remain genetically unexplained. Although some of these cases might be due to lifestyle, environmental factors, or cancer treatments, it is likely that additional polyposis predisposition genes will be identified. This Review provides an overview of the known syndromes and genes, genetic testing, and clinical management of patients with polyposis, and recent advances and challenges in the field of gastrointestinal polyposis.

[Clinical Application Examples of a Next-Generation Sequencing based Multi-Genepanel Analysis]

This review provides an overview of clinically useful applications of a next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based multi-gene panel testing strategy in the areas of oncology, hereditary tumor syndromes, and hematology. In the case of solid tumors (e.g. lung carcinoma, colon-rectal carcinoma), the detection of somatic mutations contributes not only to a better diagnostic but also therapeutic stratification of those affected. The increasing genetic complexity of hereditary tumor syndromes (e.g. breast and ovarian carcinoma, lynch syndrome/polyposis) requires a multi-gene panel analysis of germline mutations in affected families. Another useful indication for a multi-gene panel diagnostics and prognosis assessment are acute and chronic myeloid diseases. The criteria of the WHO-classification and the European LeukemiaNet-prognosis system for acute myeloid leukemia can only be met by a multi-gene panel test strategy.

Germline Testing Around the Globe: Challenges in Different Practice Settings

Cancer is an increasing global public health burden. Lately, more emphasis has emerged on the importance of heredity in cancer, mostly driven by the introduction of germline genetic variants-directed therapeutics. It is true that 40% of cancer risk is attributed to modifiable environmental and lifestyle factors; still, 16% of cancers could be heritable, accounting for 2.9 of the 18.1 million cases diagnosed worldwide. At least two third of those will be diagnosed in countries with limited resources-low- and middle-income countries, especially where high rates of consanguine marriage and early age at diagnosis are already prevalent. Both are hallmarks of hereditary cancer. This creates a new opportunity for prevention, early detection, and recently therapeutic intervention. However, this opportunity is challenged by many obstacles along the path to addressing germline testing in patients with cancer in the clinic worldwide. Global collaboration and expertise exchange are important to bridge the knowledge gap and facilitate practical implementation. Adapting existing guidelines and prioritization according to local resources are essential to address the unique needs and overcome the unique barriers of each society.

Diagnostic yield of genetic screening in a diverse, community-ascertained cohort

BACKGROUND

Population screening for genetic risk of adult-onset preventable conditions has been proposed as an attractive public health intervention. Screening unselected individuals can identify many individuals who will not be identified through current genetic testing guidelines.

METHODS

We sought to evaluate enrollment in and diagnostic yield of population genetic screening in a resource-limited setting among a diverse population. We developed a low-cost, short-read next-generation sequencing panel of 25 genes that had 98.4% sensitivity and 99.98% specificity compared to diagnostic panels. We used email invitations to recruit a diverse cohort of patients in the University of Washington Medical Center system unselected for personal or family history of hereditary disease. Participants were sent a saliva collection kit in the mail with instructions on kit use and return. Results were returned using a secure online portal. Enrollment and diagnostic yield were assessed overall and across race and ethnicity groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 40,857 people were invited and 2889 (7.1%) enrolled. Enrollment varied across race and ethnicity groups, with the lowest enrollment among African American individuals (3.3%) and the highest among Multiracial or Other Race individuals (13.0%). Of 2864 enrollees who received screening results, 106 actionable variants were identified in 103 individuals (3.6%). Of those who screened positive, 30.1% already knew about their results from prior genetic testing. The diagnostic yield was 74 new, actionable genetic findings (2.6%). The addition of more recently identified cancer risk genes increased the diagnostic yield of screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Population screening can identify additional individuals that could benefit from prevention, but challenges in recruitment and sample collection will reduce actual enrollment and yield. These challenges should not be overlooked in intervention planning or in cost and benefit analysis.

Pathology-supported genetic testing for the application of breast cancer pharmacodiagnostics: family counselling, lifestyle adjustments and change of medication

BACKGROUND

Pathology-supported genetic testing (PSGT) enables transitioning of risk stratification from the study population to the individual.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We provide an overview of the translational research performed in postmenopausal breast cancer patients at increased risk of osteoporosis due to aromatase inhibitor therapy, as the indication for referral. Both tumour histopathology and blood biochemistry levels were assessed to identify actionable disease pathways using whole exome sequencing (WES).

RESULTS

The causes and consequences of inadequate vitamin D levels as a modifiable risk factor for bone loss were highlighted in 116 patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Comparison of lifestyle factors and WES data between cases with vitamin D levels at extreme upper and lower ranges identified obesity as a major discriminating factor, with the lowest levels recorded during winter. Functional polymorphisms in the vitamin D receptor gene contributed independently to therapy-related osteoporosis risk. In a patient with invasive lobular carcinoma, genetic counselling facilitated investigation of the potential modifying effect of a rare CDH1 variant co-occurring withBRCA1 c.66dup (p.Glu23ArgfsTer18).

CONCLUSION

Validation of PSGT as a three-pronged pharmacodiagnostics tool for generation of adaptive reports and data reinterpretation during follow-up represents a new paradigm in personalised medicine, exposing significant limitations to overcome.

Unexpected Findings in Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome: Low-Level Constitutional Mosaicism in BRCA2

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) is a clinical entity characterized by an increased risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. The genetic diagnosis is based on the identification of heterozygous germinal variants in HBOC susceptibility genes. However, it has recently been described that constitutional mosaic variants can contribute to the aetiology of HBOC. In constitutional mosaicism, individuals have at least two genotypically distinct populations of cells that arise from an early post-zygote event. The mutational event occurs early enough in development to affect several tissues. It is detected in germinal genetic studies as low variant allele frequency (VAF) variants (<30%) that are generally overlooked during the prioritization process. Constitutional mosaic variants can affect both somatic and germinal cells, and thus can be passed to the offspring and have important consequences for genetic counselling. In this work, we report the c.9648+1G>A mosaic variant in the BRCA2 gene and propose a diagnostic algorithm to deal with potential mosaic findings identified by Next Generation Sequencing (NGS).

Is Reflex Germline BRCA1/2 Testing Necessary in Women Diagnosed with Non-Mucinous High-Grade Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Aged 80 Years or Older?

Women diagnosed with non-mucinous high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in England are often reflex-tested for germline and tumour BRCA1/2 variants. The value of germline BRCA1/2 testing in women diagnosed aged ≥80 is questionable. We performed an observational study of all women diagnosed with non-mucinous high-grade EOC who underwent germline and tumour BRCA1/2 testing by the North West of England Genomic Laboratory Hub. A subgroup of women also underwent germline testing using a panel of homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes and/or tumour testing for homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) using Myriad's myChoice® companion diagnostic. Seven-hundred-two patients successfully underwent both germline and tumour BRCA1/2 testing. Of these, 48 were diagnosed with non-mucinous high-grade EOC aged ≥80. In this age group, somatic BRCA1/2 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PV/LPVs) were detected nine times more often than germline BRCA1/2 PV/LPVs. The only germline PV reported in a patient aged ≥80 was detected in germline and tumour DNA (BRCA2 c.4478_4481del). No patient aged ≥80 had a germline PV/LPVs in a non-BRCA1/2 HRR gene. Thirty-eight percent of patients aged ≥80 had a tumour positive for HRD. Our data suggest that tumour BRCA1/2 and HRD testing is adequate for patients diagnosed with non-mucinous high-grade EOC aged ≥80, with germline BRCA1/2 testing reserved for women with a tumour BRCA1/2 PV/LPVs.

Genetic Predisposition to Colorectal Cancer: How Many and Which Genes to Test?

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common tumors, and genetic predisposition is one of the key risk factors in the development of this malignancy. Lynch syndrome and familial adenomatous polyposis are the best-known genetic diseases associated with hereditary colorectal cancer. However, some other genetic disorders confer an increased risk of colorectal cancer, such as Li-Fraumeni syndrome (TP53 gene), MUTYH-associated polyposis (MUTYH gene), Peutz-Jeghers syndrome (STK11 gene), Cowden syndrome (PTEN gene), and juvenile polyposis syndrome (BMPR1A and SMAD4 genes). Moreover, the recent advances in molecular techniques, in particular Next-Generation Sequencing, have led to the identification of many new genes involved in the predisposition to colorectal cancers, such as RPS20, POLE, POLD1, AXIN2, NTHL1, MSH3, RNF43 and GREM1. In this review, we summarized the past and more recent findings in the field of cancer predisposition genes, with insights into the role of the encoded proteins and into the associated genetic disorders. Furthermore, we discussed the possible clinical utility of genetic testing in terms of prevention protocols and therapeutic approaches.

High detection rate from genetic testing in BRCA-negative women with familial epithelial ovarian cancer

PURPOSE

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is associated with pathogenic variants (PVs) in homologous recombination and/or mismatch repair genes. We aimed to review the testing of women with familial EOC at our center.

METHODS

Women with familial EOC (≥2 EOC in family, including index case) referred to our center between 1993 and 2021 were included. Genetic testing (BRCA/Lynch syndrome screening, exome sequencing, panel testing, 100,000 Genome Project, and NIHR BioResource genome sequencing) and clinical demographic, diagnosis, and survival data were reviewed.

RESULTS

Of 277, 128 (46.2%) women were BRCA heterozygotes (BRCA1: 89, BRCA2: 39). The detection rate in BRCA-negative women was 21.8%; the most commonly affected gene was BRIP1 (5.9%). The non-BRCA detection rate was significantly higher in families with 2 affected members with EOC only (22.4%) than the families with ≥3 (11.1%) affected members (odds ratio = 9.9, 95% CI = 1.6-105.2, P = .0075). Overall, 112 different PVs in 12 homologous recombination/mismatch repair genes were detected in 150 of 277 (54.2%) unrelated women.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest report of women with familial EOC undergoing wider testing to date. One-fifth of BRCA-negative women were heterozygous for a PV in a potentially actionable gene. Wider genetic testing of women with familial EOC is essential to optimize their treatment and prevention of disease in family members.

UK consensus recommendations for clinical management of cancer risk for women with germline pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes: RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1 and PALB2

Germline pathogenic variants (GPVs) in the cancer predisposition genes BRCA1, BRCA2, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, BRIP1, PALB2, RAD51D and RAD51C are identified in approximately 15% of patients with ovarian cancer (OC). While there are clear guidelines around clinical management of cancer risk in patients with GPV in BRCA1, BRCA2, MLH1, MSH2 and MSH6, there are few guidelines on how to manage the more moderate OC risk in patients with GPV in BRIP1, PALB2, RAD51D and RAD51C, with clinical questions about appropriateness and timing of risk-reducing gynaecological surgery. Furthermore, while recognition of RAD51C and RAD51D as OC predisposition genes has been established for several years, an association with breast cancer (BC) has only more recently been described and clinical management of this risk has been unclear. With expansion of genetic testing of these genes to all patients with non-mucinous OC, new data on BC risk and improved estimates of OC risk, the UK Cancer Genetics Group and CanGene-CanVar project convened a 2-day meeting to reach a national consensus on clinical management of BRIP1, PALB2, RAD51D and RAD51C carriers in clinical practice. In this paper, we present a summary of the processes used to reach and agree on a consensus, as well as the key recommendations from the meeting.

Frequency of pathogenic germline variants in cancer susceptibility genes in 1336 renal cell carcinoma cases

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) occurs in a number of cancer predisposition syndromes, but the genetic architecture of susceptibility to RCC is not well defined. We investigated the frequency of pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP) germline variants in cancer susceptibility genes (CSGs) within a large series of unselected RCC participants. Whole-genome sequencing data on 1336 RCC participants and 5834 controls recruited to the UK 100 000 Genomes Project, a nationwide multicentre study, was analyzed to identify rare P/LP short variants (single nucleotide variants and insertions/deletions ranging from 1 to 50 base pairs) and structural variants in 121 CSGs. Among 1336 RCC participants [mean: 61.3 years (±12 SD), range: 13-88 years; 64% male], 85 participants [6.4%; 95% CI (5.1, 7.8)] had one or more P/LP germline variant in a wider range of CSGs than previously recognized. A further 64 intragenic variants in CSGs previously associated with RCC were classified as a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) (24 'hot VUSs') and were considered to be of potential clinical relevance as further evaluation might results in their reclassification. Most patients with P variants in well-established CSGs known to predispose to renal cell carcinoma (RCC-CSGs) were aged <50 years. Burden test analysis for filtered variants in CSGs demonstrated a significant excess of CHEK2 variants in European RCC participants compared with the healthy European controls (P = 0.0019). Approximately, 6% of the patients with RCC unselected for family history have a germline variant requiring additional follow-up analysis. To improve diagnostic yield, we suggest expanding the panel of RCC-CSGs tested to include CHEK2 and all SDHx subunits and raising the eligibility criteria for age-based testing.

The Gene Curation Coalition: A global effort to harmonize gene-disease evidence resources

PURPOSE

Several groups and resources provide information that pertains to the validity of gene-disease relationships used in genomic medicine and research; however, universal standards and terminologies to define the evidence base for the role of a gene in disease and a single harmonized resource were lacking. To tackle this issue, the Gene Curation Coalition (GenCC) was formed.

METHODS

The GenCC drafted harmonized definitions for differing levels of gene-disease validity on the basis of existing resources, and performed a modified Delphi survey with 3 rounds to narrow the list of terms. The GenCC also developed a unified database to display curated gene-disease validity assertions from its members.

RESULTS

On the basis of 241 survey responses from the genetics community, a consensus term set was chosen for grading gene-disease validity and database submissions. As of December 2021, the database contained 15,241 gene-disease assertions on 4569 unique genes from 12 submitters. When comparing submissions to the database from distinct sources, conflicts in assertions of gene-disease validity ranged from 5.3% to 13.4%.

CONCLUSION

Terminology standardization, sharing of gene-disease validity classifications, and resolution of curation conflicts will facilitate collaborations across international curation efforts and in turn, improve consistency in genetic testing and variant interpretation.

Germline variant testing in serrated polyposis syndrome

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) is now known to be the commonest polyposis syndrome. Previous analyses for germline variants have shown no consistent positive findings. To exclude other polyposis syndromes, 2019 British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) guidelines advise gene panel testing if the patient is under 50 years, there are multiple affected individuals within a family, or there is dysplasia within any of the polyps.

METHODS

A database of SPS patients was established at the Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. Patients were referred for genetic assessment based on personal and family history and patient preference. The majority were tested for a hereditary colorectal cancer panel including MUTYH, APC, PTEN, SMAD4, BMPR1A, STK11, NTLH1, POLD1, POLE, GREM1 (40-kb duplication), PMS2, and Lynch syndrome mismatch repair genes.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventy-three patients were diagnosed with SPS based on World Health Organization 2019 criteria between February 2010 and December 2020. The mean age of diagnosis was 54.2 ± 16.8 years. Seventy-three patients underwent genetic testing and 15/73 (20.5%) were found to have germline variants, of which 7/73 (9.6%) had a pathogenic variant (MUTYH n = 2, SMAD4 n = 1, CHEK2 n = 2, POLD1 n = 1, and RNF43 n = 1). Only 60% (9/15) of these patients would have been recommended for gene panel testing according to current BSG guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

A total of 20.5% of SPS patients tested were affected by heterozygous germline variants, including previously unreported associations with CHEK2 and POLD1. This led to a change in management in seven patients (9.6%). Current recommendations may miss SPS associated with germline variants, which is more common than previously anticipated.

Multilocus Inherited Neoplasia Allele Syndrome (MINAS): an update

Multi-locus Inherited Neoplasia Allele Syndrome (MINAS) refers to individuals with germline pathogenic variants in two or more cancer susceptibility genes(CSGs). With increased use of exome/genome sequencing it would be predicted that detection of MINAS would become more frequent. Here we review recent progress in knowledge of MINAS. A systematic literature search for reports of individuals with germline pathogenic variants in 2 or more of 94 CSGs was performed. In addition, participants with multiple primary tumours who underwent genome sequencing as part of the Rare Disease arm of the UK 100,000 Genomes Project were interrogated to detect additional cases. We identified 385 MINAS cases (211 reported in the last 5 years, 6 from 100,000 genomes participants). Most (287/385) cases contained at least one pathogenic variant in either BRCA1 or BRCA2. 108/385 MINAS cases had multiple primary tumours at presentation and a subset of cases presented unusual multiple tumour phenotypes. We conclude that, as predicted, increasing numbers of individuals with MINAS are being have been reported but, except for individuals with BRCA1/BRCA2 MINAS, individual CSG combinations are generally rare. In many cases it appears that the clinical phenotype is that which would be expected from the effects of the constituent CSG variants acting independently. However, in some instances the presence of unusual tumour phenotypes and/or multiple primary tumours suggests that there may be complex interactions between the relevant MINAS CSGs. Systematic reporting of MINAS cases in a MINAS database (e.g. https://databases.lovd.nl/shared/diseases/04296 ) will facilitate more accurate prognostic predictions for specific CSG combinations.

Half of germline pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants found on panel tests do not fulfil NHS testing criteria

Genetic testing for cancer predisposition has been curtailed by the cost of sequencing, and testing has been restricted by eligibility criteria. As the cost of sequencing decreases, the question of expanding multi-gene cancer panels to a broader population arises. We evaluated how many additional actionable genetic variants are returned by unrestricted panel testing in the private sector compared to those which would be returned by adhering to current NHS eligibility criteria. We reviewed 152 patients referred for multi-gene cancer panels in the private sector between 2014 and 2016. Genetic counselling and disclosure of all results was standard of care provided by the Consultant. Every panel conducted was compared to current eligibility criteria. A germline pathogenic / likely pathogenic variant (P/LP), in a gene relevant to the personal or family history of cancer, was detected in 15 patients (detection rate of 10%). 46.7% of those found to have the P/LP variants (7 of 15), or 4.6% of the entire set (7 of 152), did not fulfil NHS eligibility criteria. 46.7% of P/LP variants in this study would have been missed by national testing guidelines, all of which were actionable. However, patients who do not fulfil eligibility criteria have a higher Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) burden. We demonstrated that the current England NHS threshold for genetic testing is missing pathogenic variants which would alter management in 4.6%, nearly 1 in 20 individuals. However, the clinical service burden that would ensue is a detection of VUS of 34%.

Préoccupations et besoins d’aide psychologiques chez les femmes à risque génétique de cancer du sein ou de l’ovaire : une étude prospective observationnelle en Allemagne, Espagne et France

Objectifs et contexte : L’arrivée des tests de panel de gènes a augmenté la complexité de la communication en consultation d’oncogénétique. Une attention quant à l’impact de cette communication sur les préoccupations et les besoins d’aide psychologique s’avère d’autant plus indispensable. Cette étude vise à en quantifier le type et l’ampleur, avant et après la communication du résultat de test génétique, chez des femmes s’adressant à la consultation d’oncogénétique pour réaliser un test de susceptibilité au cancer du sein ou de l’ovaire en Allemagne, Espagne et France.

Participants et mesures : Parmi les 752 personnes invitées consécutivement à participer à cette étude, 646 (86 %) ― dont 510 (68 %) atteintes d’un cancer du sein―ont répondu à un questionnaire (PAHC (Psychosocial Aspects of Hereditary Cancer)) portant d’une part sur les préoccupations spécifiques à la démarche en oncogénétique et d’autre part sur leurs besoins d’aide psychologique ; questionnaire proposé après la consultation initiale d’oncogénétique initiale (T1) et, pour 460 (61 %) d’entre elles, deux mois après la communication du résultat du test (T2).

Résultats : Soixante-dix-neuf (17,2 %), 19 (4,1 %), 259 (56,3 %), 44 (9,6 %), 59 (12,8 %) femmes ont reçu respectivement les résultats suivants : un variant pathogène sur BRCA1/2 ou sur autre gène à risque élevé ou modéré, un résultat négatif non informatif, un résultat négatif vrai, ou la présence d’un variant dont la signification clinique est incertaine (VUS). Le type de préoccupations et les besoins d’aide psychologique se sont révélés variables selon les pays. Cependant, globalement, les préoccupations les plus fréquentes (> 70 %) étaient relatives à la perte d’un proche familial par cancer, et les moins fréquentes (< 5 %) relatives au soutien des proches. La plupart de ces préoccupations persistent deux mois plus tard, à la suite du résultat de test génétique. En revanche, le besoin d’aide psychologique a globalement diminué sur le plan statistique, excepté, selon le pays, pour les préoccupations familiales/sociales, les difficultés émotionnelles ou les aspects pratiques.

Conclusions : Dans notre étude portant sur des femmes issues de trois pays européens s’adressant à la consultation oncogénétique en vue de réaliser un test de susceptibilité au cancer du sein ou de l’ovaire, la plupart des préoccupations liées à la situation génétique persistent deux mois après la communication du résultat de test, et les besoins d’aide psychologique se manifestent surtout dans le champ des relations et des émotions.

Person-based co-design of a decision aid template for people with a genetic predisposition to cancer

Background

People with genetic predispositions to cancer are faced with complex health decisions about managing their risk. Decision aids can support informed, values-based decisions, alongside shared decision-making with a clinician. Whilst diagnoses of genetic predispositions to cancer are increasing, there is no scalable decision aid to support these people. This paper presents an accessible, relevant decision aid template which can be adapted for different predispositions to cancer.

Methods

The decision aid template was co-developed with 12 patients affected by cancer and informed by empirical and theoretical literature. In addition, consultations were conducted with a further 19 people with Lynch syndrome; a specific genetic predisposition to cancer. Clinical stakeholders were consulted regularly. Coulter's framework for decision aid development guided the process, and these activities were complemented by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards, and the latest evidence on communicating risk in decision aids. Programme theory was developed to hypothesise how the decision aid would support decision-making and contextual factors which could influence the process. Guiding principles co-developed with the patient panel described how the decision aid could effectively engage people.

Results

The in-depth co-design process led to the identification of five core components of an accessible decision aid template for people with a genetic predisposition to cancer: defining the decision; option grid showing implications of each option; optional further details such as icon arrays to show tailored risk and personal narratives; values clarification activity; and a summary to facilitate discussion with a clinician. Specific guidance was produced describing how to develop each component. The guiding principles identified that the decision aid template needed to promote trust, reduce distress, and be comprehensive, personally relevant and accessible in order to engage people.

Conclusion

Adopting a co-design process helped ensure that the decision aid components were relevant and accessible to the target population. The template could have widespread application through being adapted for different genetic predispositions. The exact content should be co-designed with people from diverse backgrounds with lived experience of the specific predisposition to ensure it is as useful, engaging and relevant as possible.

Multi-Gene Panel Testing in Gastroenterology: Are We Ready for the Results?

Genetic testing aims to identify patients at risk for inherited cancer susceptibility. In the last decade, there was a significant increase in the request of broader panels of genes as multi-gene panel testing became widely available. However, physicians may be faced with genetic findings for which there is lack of management evidence, despite some progress in understanding their clinical relevance. In this short review, we discuss the advantages and the drawbacks related to multi-gene panel testing in the setting of a Gastrointestinal Familial Cancer Risk clinic. We also summarize the available recommendations on management of pathogenic variant carriers.

A Review of Breast Cancer Risk Factors in Adolescents and Young Adults

Simple Summary

Cancer diagnosed in patients between the ages of 15 and 39 deserves special consideration. Diagnoses within this cohort of adolescents and young adults include childhood cancers which present at an older age than expected, or an early presentation of cancers that are typically observed in older adults, such as breast cancer. Cancers within this age group are associated with worse disease-free and overall survival rates, and the incidence of these cases are rising. Knowing an individual’s susceptibility to disease can change their clinical management and allow for the risk-testing of relatives. This review discusses the risk factors that contribute to breast cancer in this unique cohort of patients, including inherited genetic risk factors, as well as environmental and lifestyle factors. We also describe risk models that allow clinicians to quantify a patient’s lifetime risk of developing disease.

Abstract

Cancer in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) deserves special consideration for several reasons. AYA cancers encompass paediatric malignancies that present at an older age than expected, or early-onset of cancers that are typically observed in adults. However, disease diagnosed in the AYA population is distinct to those same cancers which are diagnosed in a paediatric or older adult setting. Worse disease-free and overall survival outcomes are observed in the AYA setting, and the incidence of AYA cancers is increasing. Knowledge of an individual’s underlying cancer predisposition can influence their clinical care and may facilitate early tumour surveillance strategies and cascade testing of at-risk relatives. This information can further influence reproductive decision making. In this review we discuss the risk factors contributing to AYA breast cancer, such as heritable predisposition, environmental, and lifestyle factors. We also describe a number of risk models which incorporate genetic factors that aid clinicians in quantifying an individual’s lifetime risk of disease.

Massive parallel sequencing in individuals with multiple primary tumours reveals the benefit of re-analysis

Multiple primary cancers, defined as three or more primary tumours, are rare, and there are few genetic studies concerning them. There is a need for increased knowledge on the heritability of multiple primary cancers and genotype-phenotype correlations. We have performed whole-genome/exome sequencing (WGS/WES) in ten individuals with three or more primary tumours, with no previous findings on standard clinical genetic investigations. In one individual with a clinical diagnosis of MEN1, a likely pathogenic cryptic splice site variant was detected in the MEN1 gene. The variant (c.654C > A) is synonymous but we showed in a cDNA analysis that it affects splicing and leads to a frameshift, with the theoretical new amino acid sequence p.(Gly219Glufs*13). In one individual with metachronous colorectal cancers, ovarian cancer, endometrial cancer and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, we found a likely pathogenic variant in the MLH1 gene (c.27G > A), and two risk factor variants in the genes CHEK2 and HOXB13. The MLH1 variant is synonymous but has previously been shown to be associated to constitutional low-grade hypermethylation of the MLH1 promoter, and segregates with disease in families with colorectal and endometrial cancer. No pathogenic single nucleotide or structural variants were detected in the remaining eight individuals in the study. The pathogenic variants found by WGS/WES were in genes already sequenced by Sanger sequencing and WES in the clinic, without any findings. We conclude that, in individuals with an unequivocal clinical diagnosis of a specific hereditary cancer syndrome, where standard clinical testing failed to detect a causative variant, re-analysis may lead to a diagnosis.

Clinical utility of testing for PALB2 and CHEK2 c.1100delC in breast and ovarian cancer

Purpose

To investigate the contribution of PALB2 pathogenic gene variants (PGVs, PALB2_PGV) and the CHEK2 c.1100delC (CHEK2_1100delC) PGV to familial breast and ovarian cancer, and PALB2_PGV associated breast cancer pathology.

Methods

Outcomes of germline PALB2_PGV and CHEK2_1100delC testing were recorded in 3,127 women with histologically confirmed diagnoses of invasive breast cancer, carcinoma in situ, or epithelial nonmucinous ovarian cancer, and 1,567 female controls. Breast cancer pathology was recorded in PALB2_PGV cases from extended families.

Results

Thirty-five PALB2 and 44 CHEK2_1100delC PGVs were detected in patients (odds ratio [OR] PALB2 breast–ovarian = 5.90 [95% CI: 1.92–18.36], CHEK2 breast–ovarian = 4.46 [95% CI: 1.86–10.46], PALB2 breast = 6.16 [95% CI: 1.98–19.21], CHEK2 breast = 4.89 [95% CI: 2.01–11.34]). Grade 3 ER-positive HER2-negative, grade 3 and triple negative (TN) tumors were enriched in cases with PALB2 PGVs compared with all breast cancers known to our service (respectively: 15/43, 254/1,843, P = 0.0005; 28/37, 562/1,381, P = 0.0001; 12/43, 204/1,639, P < 0.0001). PALB2_PGV likelihood increased with increasing Manchester score (MS) (MS < 15 = 17/1,763, MS 20–39 = 11/520, P = 0.04) but not for CHEK2_1100delC (MS < 15 = 29/1,762, MS 20–39 = 4/520). PALB2 PGVs showed perfect segregation in 20/20 first-degree relatives with breast cancer, compared with 7/13 for CHEK2_1100delC (P = 0.002).

Conclusion

PALB2 PGVs and CHEK2_1100delC together account for ~2.5% of familial breast/ovarian cancer risk. PALB2 PGVs are associated with grade 3, TN, and grade 3 ER-positive HER2-negative breast tumors.

From BRCA1 to Polygenic Risk Scores: Mutation-Associated Risks in Breast Cancer-Related Genes

Background

There has been huge progress over the last 30 years in identifying the familial component of breast cancer.

Summary

Currently around 20% is explained by the high-risk genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, a further 2% by other high-penetrance genes, and around 5% by the moderate risk genes ATM and CHEK2. In contrast, the more than 300 low-penetrance single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) now account for around 28% and they are predicted to account for most of the remaining 45% yet to be found. Even for high-risk genes which confer a 40-90% risk of breast cancer, these SNP can substantially affect the level of breast cancer risk. Indeed, the strength of family history and hormonal and reproductive factors is very important in assessing risk even for a BRCA carrier. The risks of contralateral breast cancer are also affected by SNP as well as by the presence of high or moderate risk genes. Genetic testing using gene panels is now commonplace.

Key-Messages

There is a need for a more parsimonious approach to panels only testing those genes with a definite 2-fold increased risk and only testing those genes with challenging management implications, such as CDH1 and TP53, when there is strong clinical indication to do so. Testing of SNP alongside genes is likely to provide a more accurate risk assessment.

Integrating Clinical and Polygenic Factors to Predict Breast Cancer Risk in Women Undergoing Genetic Testing

PURPOSE

Screening and prevention decisions for women at increased risk of developing breast cancer depend on genetic and clinical factors to estimate risk and select appropriate interventions. Integration of polygenic risk into clinical breast cancer risk estimators can improve discrimination. However, correlated genetic effects must be incorporated carefully to avoid overestimation of risk.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A novel Fixed-Stratified method was developed that accounts for confounding when adding a new factor to an established risk model. A combined risk score (CRS) of an 86-single-nucleotide polymorphism polygenic risk score and the Tyrer-Cuzick v7.02 clinical risk estimator was generated with attenuation for confounding by family history. Calibration and discriminatory accuracy of the CRS were evaluated in two independent validation cohorts of women of European ancestry (N = 1,615 and N = 518). Discrimination for remaining lifetime risk was examined by age-adjusted logistic regression. Risk stratification with a 20% risk threshold was compared between CRS and Tyrer-Cuzick in an independent clinical cohort (N = 32,576).

RESULTS

Simulation studies confirmed that the Fixed-Stratified method produced accurate risk estimation across patients with different family history. In both validation studies, CRS and Tyrer-Cuzick were significantly associated with breast cancer. In an analysis with both CRS and Tyrer-Cuzick as predictors of breast cancer, CRS added significant discrimination independent of that captured by Tyrer-Cuzick (P < 10-11 in validation 1; P < 10-7 in validation 2). In an independent cohort, 18% of women shifted breast cancer risk categories from their Tyrer-Cuzick-based risk compared with risk estimates by CRS.

CONCLUSION

Integrating clinical and polygenic factors into a risk model offers more effective risk stratification and supports a personalized genomic approach to breast cancer screening and prevention.

Epigenetics in Breast Cancer Therapy-New Strategies and Future Nanomedicine Perspectives

Epigenetic dysregulation has been recognized as a critical factor contributing to the development of resistance against standard chemotherapy and to breast cancer progression via epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition. Although the efficacy of the first-generation epigenetic drugs (epi-drugs) in solid tumor management has been disappointing, there is an increasing body of evidence showing that epigenome modulation, in synergy with other therapeutic approaches, could play an important role in cancer treatment, reversing acquired therapy resistance. However, the epigenetic therapy of solid malignancies is not straightforward. The emergence of nanotechnologies applied to medicine has brought new opportunities to advance the targeted delivery of epi-drugs while improving their stability and solubility, and minimizing off-target effects. Furthermore, the omics technologies, as powerful molecular epidemiology screening tools, enable new diagnostic and prognostic epigenetic biomarker identification, allowing for patient stratification and tailored management. In combination with new-generation epi-drugs, nanomedicine can help to overcome low therapeutic efficacy in treatment-resistant tumors. This review provides an overview of ongoing clinical trials focusing on combination therapies employing epi-drugs for breast cancer treatment and summarizes the latest nano-based targeted delivery approaches for epi-drugs. Moreover, it highlights the current limitations and obstacles associated with applying these experimental strategies in the clinics.

Referencing BRCA in hereditary cancer risk discussions: In search of an anchor in a sea of uncertainty

As panel testing and exome sequencing are increasingly incorporated into clinical care, clinicians must grapple with how to communicate the risks and treatment decisions surrounding breast cancer genes beyond BRCA1 and BRCA2. In this paper, we examine clinicians' practice of employing BRCA1 and BRCA2 to help contextualize less certain genetic information regarding cancer risk and the possible implications of this practice for patients within the context of an exome sequencing study, NCGENES. We audio-recorded return of results appointments for 14 women who participated in NCGENES, previously had breast cancer, and were suspected of having a hereditary cancer predisposition. These patients were also interviewed four weeks later regarding their understanding of their results. We found that BRCA1 and BRCA2 were held as the gold standard, where clinicians compared what is known about BRCA to the limited understanding of other breast cancer-related genes. BRCA1 and BRCA2 were used as anchors to shape patients' understandings of genetic knowledge, risk, and management, illustrating how the information clinicians provide to patients may work as an external anchor. Yet, presenting BRCA1 and BRCA2 as a means of scientific reassurance can run the risk of patients conflating knowledge about certainty of risk with degree of risk after receiving a result for a moderate penetrance gene. This can be further complicated by misperceptions of the precision of cancer predictability attributed to these or other described 'cancer genes' in public media.

Pathogenic Germline Mutations of DNA Repair Pathway Components in Early-Onset Sporadic Colorectal Polyp and Cancer Patients

Simple Summary

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by immuno-fecal occult blood tests (iFOBTs) begins at age 50 in average-risk persons. However, the incidence of early-onset CRC has risen; of the cases, at least half are sporadic CRC without a family history. The authors of this study found a high percentage of de novo germline mutation in young sporadic CRC patients, as well as in sporadic colorectal polyp and control groups. All the mutated genes contribute to various DNA-repair pathways, hinting that a loss of genomic integrity play a crucial role in the development of CRC. The early identification of cancer-susceptible individuals by multigene panels in younger individuals who may be missed under current iFOBT screening could contribute to preventing CRC.

Abstract

Given recent increases in the proportion of early-onset colorectal cancer (CRC), researchers are urgently working to establish a multi-gene screening test for both inherited and sporadic cancer-susceptible individuals. However, the incidence and spectrum of germline mutations in young sporadic CRC patients in East Asian countries and, especially, in sporadic polyp carriers and normal individuals are unknown. Peripheral blood samples were collected from 43 colonoscopy-proved normal controls and from 50 polyp patients and 49 CRC patients with no self-reported family history of cancer. All participants were under 50 years old. Next-generation sequencing with a panel of 30 CRC-associated susceptibility genes was employed to detect pathogenic germline mutations. The germline mutation carrier rates were 2.3%, 4.0%, and 12.2% in the normal, polyp, and cancer groups, respectively. A total of seven different mutations in six DNA repair pathway-related genes (MLH1, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, BLM, and NTHL1) were detected in nine participants. One frameshift mutation in BRCA2 and one frameshift mutation in the CHEK2 gene were found in a normal control and two colorectal polyp patients, respectively. One young sporadic CRC patient carried two heterozygous mutations, one in MLH1 and one in BRCA1. Three mutations (MLH1 p.Arg265Cys, MLH1 p.Tyr343Ter and CHEK2 p.Ile158TyrfsTer10) were each found in two independent patients and were considered “founder” mutations. This is the first report to demonstrate high percentage of germline mutations in young sporadic colorectal polyp, CRC, and general populations. A multi-gene screening test is warranted for the proactive identification of cancer-predisposed individuals.

Implementing gene curation for hereditary cancer susceptibility in Australia: achieving consensus on genes with clinical utility

BACKGROUND

The strength of evidence supporting the validity of gene-disease relationships is variable. Hereditary cancer has the additional complexity of low or moderate penetrance for some confirmed disease-associated alleles.

METHODS

To promote national consistency in interpretation of hereditary cancer/tumour gene test results, we requested opinions of representatives from Australian Family Cancer Clinics regarding the clinical utility of 157 genes initially collated for a national research project. Viewpoints were sought by initial survey, face-to-face workshop and follow-up survey. Subsequent review was undertaken by the eviQ Cancer Genetics Reference Committee, a national resource providing evidence-based and consensus-driven cancer treatment protocols.

RESULTS

Genes were categorised by clinical actionability as: relevant for testing on presentation of common cancer/tumour types (n=45); relevant for testing in the context of specific rare phenotypes (n=74); insufficient clinical utility (n=34) or contentious clinical utility (n=3). Opinions for several genes altered during the study time frame, due to new information.

CONCLUSION

Through an iterative process, consensus was achieved on genes with clinical utility for hereditary cancer/tumour conditions in the Australian setting. This study highlighted need for regular review of gene-disease lists, a role assumed in Australia for hereditary cancer/tumour predisposition genes by the eviQ Cancer Genetics Reference Committee.

Genomic Profiling Comparison of Germline BRCA and Non-BRCA Carriers Reveals CCNE1 Amplification as a Risk Factor for Non-BRCA Carriers in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Background: Differences in genomic profiling and immunity-associated parameters between germline BRCA and non-BRCA carriers in TNBC with high tumor burden remain unexplored. This study aimed to compare the differences and explore potential prognostic predictors and therapeutic targets. Methods: The study cohort included 21 consecutive TNBC cases with germline BRCA1/2 mutations and 54 non-BRCA carriers with a tumor size ≥ 2 cm and/or ≥1 affected lymph nodes. Differences in clinicopathological characteristics and genomic profiles were analyzed through next-generation sequencing. Univariate Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression model were applied to survival analysis. Immunohistochemistry was used to confirm the consistency between CCNE1 amplification and cyclin E1 protein overexpression. Results: The cohort included 16 and five patients with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, respectively. Patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations were diagnosed at a significantly younger age and were more likely to have a family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer. Six non-BRCA carriers (11.11%) carried germline mutations in other cancer susceptibility genes, including five mutations in five homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway genes (9.26%) and one mutation in MSH3 (1.85%). Somatic mutations in HRR pathway genes were found in 22.22 and 14.29% of the non-BRCA and BRCA carriers, respectively. PIK3CA missense mutation (p = 0.046) and CCNE1 amplification (p = 0.2) were found only in the non-BRCA carriers. The median tumor mutation burden (TMB) was 4.1 Muts/Mb, whereas none of the cases had high microsatellite instability (MSI). BRCA status did not affect disease-free survival (DFS, p = 0.15) or overall survival (OS, p = 0.52). CCNE1 amplification was an independent risk factor for DFS in non-BRCA carriers with TNBC (HR 13.07, 95% CI 2.47-69.24, p = 0.003). Consistency between CCNE1 amplification and cyclin E1 protein overexpression was confirmed with an AUC of 0.967 for cyclin E1 signal intensity. Conclusions: We found differences in genetic alterations between germline BRCA and non-BRCA carriers with TNBC and a high tumor burden. TMB and MSI may not be suitable predictors of TNBC for immune checkpoint inhibitors. Notably, CCNE1 amplification is a novel potential prognostic marker and therapeutic target for non-BRCA carriers with TNBC. Cyclin E1 may be used instead of CCNE1 to improve clinical applicability.

Comprehensive analysis and ACMG-based classification of CHEK2 variants in hereditary cancer patients

CHEK2 variants are associated with intermediate breast cancer risk, among other cancers. We aimed to comprehensively describe CHEK2 variants in a Spanish hereditary cancer (HC) cohort and adjust the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG-AMP) guidelines for their classification. First, three CHEK2 frequent variants were screened in a retrospective Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer cohort of 516 patients. After, the whole CHEK2 coding region was analyzed by next-generation sequencing in 1848 prospective patients with HC suspicion. We refined ACMG-AMP criteria and applied different combined rules to classify CHEK2 variants and define risk alleles. We identified 10 CHEK2 null variants, 6 missense variants with discordant interpretation in ClinVar database, and 35 additional variants of unknown significance. Twelve variants were classified as (likely)-pathogenic; two can also be considered "established risk-alleles" and one as "likely risk-allele." The prevalence of (likely)-pathogenic variants in the HC cohort was 0.8% (1.3% in breast cancer patients and 1.0% in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer patients). Here, we provide ACMG adjustment guidelines to classify CHEK2 variants. We hope that this study would be useful for variant classification of other genes with low effect variants.

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.

Risk for breast cancer and management of unaffected individuals with non-BRCA hereditary breast cancer

About 5%-10% of breast cancer is hereditary with BRCA1 and BRCA2 being the most common genes associated with hereditary breast cancer (HBC). Several additional genes have recently been associated with HBC. These genes can be classified as highly or moderately penetrant genes with lifetime risk >30% or 17%-30%, respectively. Highly penetrant genes associated with HBC include TP53, PTEN, CDH1, STK11, and PALB2. While, moderately penetrant genes include CHEK2, ATM, BARD1, BRIP1, NBN, NF1, RAD51D, and MSH6. Breast cancer risk and recommendations for screening and risk-reduction vary by gene. In general, screening breast MRI is recommended for women at >20% lifetime risk, which includes women with mutations in highly penetrant genes and the majority (but not all) moderately penetrant genes. Consideration of chemoprevention is recommended for women with mutations in high and moderately penetrant genes. Risk-reducing mastectomy does reduce the risk of breast cancer to the greatest extent and can be considered for women with highly penetrant genes. However, this procedure is associated with significant morbidities that should be considered, especially given the benefit of using screening breast MRI for high-risk women. BSO is only recommended for women with mutations in genes associate with increased risk for ovarian cancer and not as a breast cancer risk-reducing strategy. As more women undergo testing, additional genes may be identified and risk estimates for current genes and management recommendations may be modified.

Summary of BARD1 Mutations and Precise Estimation of Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risks Associated with the Mutations

Over the last two decades, numerous BARD1 mutations/pathogenic variants (PVs) have been found in patients with breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC). However, their role in BC and OC susceptibility remains controversial, and strong evidence-based guidelines for carriers are not yet available. Herein, we present a comprehensive catalog of BARD1 PVs identified in large cumulative cohorts of ~48,700 BC and ~20,800 OC cases (retrieved from 123 studies examining the whole coding sequence of BARD1). Using these resources, we compared the frequency of BARD1 PVs in the cases and ~134,100 controls from the gnomAD database and estimated the effect of the BARD1 PVs on BC and OC risks. The analysis revealed that BARD1 is a BC moderate-risk gene (odds ratio (OR) = 2.90, 95% CIs:2.25–3.75, p < 0.0001) but not an OC risk gene (OR = 1.36, 95% CIs:0.87–2.11, p = 0.1733). In addition, the BARD1 mutational spectrum outlined in this study allowed us to determine recurrent PVs and evaluate the variant-specific risk for the most frequent PVs. In conclusion, these precise estimates improve the understanding of the role of BARD1 PVs in BC and OC predisposition and support the need for BARD1 diagnostic testing in BC patients.

Association of a Polygenic Risk Score With Breast Cancer Among Women Carriers of High- and Moderate-Risk Breast Cancer Genes

Importance

To date, few studies have examined the extent to which polygenic single-nucleotide variation (SNV) (formerly single-nucleotide polymorphism) scores modify risk for carriers of pathogenic variants (PVs) in breast cancer susceptibility genes. In previous reports, polygenic risk modification was reduced for BRCA1 and BRCA2 PV carriers compared with noncarriers, but limited information is available for carriers of CHEK2, ATM, or PALB2 PVs.

Objective

To examine an 86-SNV polygenic risk score (PRS) for BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, ATM, and PALB2 PV carriers.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective case-control study using data on 150 962 women tested with a multigene hereditary cancer panel between July 19, 2016, and January 11, 2019, was conducted in a commercial testing laboratory. Participants included women of European ancestry between the ages of 18 and 84 years.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association of the 86-SNV score with invasive breast cancer after adjusting for age, ancestry, and personal and/or family cancer history. Effect sizes, expressed as standardized odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs, were assessed for carriers of PVs in each gene as well as for noncarriers.

Results

The median age at hereditary cancer testing of the population was 48 years (range, 18-84 years); there were 141 160 noncarriers in addition to carriers of BRCA1 (n = 2249), BRCA2 (n = 2638), CHEK2 (n = 2564), ATM (n = 1445), and PALB2 (n = 906) PVs included in the analysis. The 86-SNV score was associated with breast cancer risk in each of the carrier populations (P < 1 × 10-4). Stratification was more pronounced for noncarriers (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.45-1.49) and CHEK2 PV carriers (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.36-1.64) than for carriers of BRCA1 (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.10-1.32) or BRCA2 (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.12-1.34) PVs. Odds ratios for ATM (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.21-1.55) and PALB2 (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.16-1.55) PV carrier populations were intermediate between those for BRCA1/2 and CHEK2 noncarriers.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, the 86-SNV score was associated with modified risk for carriers of BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, ATM, and PALB2 PVs. This finding supports previous reports of reduced PRS stratification for BRCA1 and BRCA2 PV carriers compared with noncarriers. Modification of risk in CHEK2 carriers associated with the 86-SNV score appeared to be similar to that observed in women without a PV. Larger studies are needed to provide more refined estimates of polygenic modification of risk for women with PVs in other moderate-penetrance genes.

UKCGG Consensus Group guidelines for the management of patients with constitutional TP53 pathogenic variants

Constitutional pathogenic variants in TP53 are associated with Li-Fraumeni syndrome or the more recently described heritable TP53-related cancer syndrome and are associated with increased lifetime risks of a wide spectrum of cancers. Due to the broad tumour spectrum, surveillance for this patient group has been limited. To date, the only recommendation in the UK has been for annual breast MRI in women; however, more recently, a more intensive surveillance protocol including whole-body MRI (WB-MRI) has been recommended by International Expert Groups. To address the gap in surveillance for this patient group in the UK, the UK Cancer Genetics Group facilitated a 1-day consensus meeting to discuss a protocol for the UK. Using a preworkshop survey followed by structured discussion on the day, we achieved consensus for a UK surveillance protocol for TP53 carriers to be adopted by UK Clinical Genetics services. The key recommendations are for annual WB-MRI and dedicated brain MRI from birth, annual breast MRI from 20 years in women and three-four monthly abdominal ultrasound in children along with review in a dedicated clinic.

Molecular pathology of Lynch syndrome

Lynch syndrome (LS) is characterised by predisposition to colorectal, endometrial, and other cancers and is caused by inherited pathogenic variants affecting the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2. It is probably the most common predisposition to cancer, having an estimated prevalence of between 1/100 and 1/180. Resources such as the International Society for Gastrointestinal Hereditary Cancer's MMR gene variant database, the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database (PLSD), and the Colon Cancer Family Register (CCFR), as well as pathological and immunological studies, are enabling advances in the understanding of LS. These include defined criteria by which to interpret gene variants, the function of MMR in the normal control of apoptosis, definition of the risks of the various cancers, and the mechanisms and pathways by which the colorectal and endometrial tumours develop, including the critical role of the immune system. Colorectal cancers in LS can develop along three pathways, including flat intramucosal lesions, which depend on the underlying affected MMR gene. This gives insights into the limitations of colonoscopic surveillance and highlights the need for other forms of anti-cancer prophylaxis in LS. Finally, it shows that the processes of autoimmunisation and immunoediting fundamentally constrain the development of tumours in LS and explain the efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade therapy in MMR-deficient tumours. © 2020 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cancer Risks Associated With Germline PALB2 Pathogenic Variants: An International Study of 524 Families

PURPOSE

To estimate age-specific relative and absolute cancer risks of breast cancer and to estimate risks of ovarian, pancreatic, male breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers associated with germline PALB2 pathogenic variants (PVs) because these risks have not been extensively characterized.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 524 families with PALB2 PVs from 21 countries. Complex segregation analysis was used to estimate relative risks (RRs; relative to country-specific population incidences) and absolute risks of cancers. The models allowed for residual familial aggregation of breast and ovarian cancer and were adjusted for the family-specific ascertainment schemes.

RESULTS

We found associations between PALB2 PVs and risk of female breast cancer (RR, 7.18; 95% CI, 5.82 to 8.85; P = 6.5 × 10-76), ovarian cancer (RR, 2.91; 95% CI, 1.40 to 6.04; P = 4.1 × 10-3), pancreatic cancer (RR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.24 to 4.50; P = 8.7 × 10-3), and male breast cancer (RR, 7.34; 95% CI, 1.28 to 42.18; P = 2.6 × 10-2). There was no evidence for increased risks of prostate or colorectal cancer. The breast cancer RRs declined with age (P for trend = 2.0 × 10-3). After adjusting for family ascertainment, breast cancer risk estimates on the basis of multiple case families were similar to the estimates from families ascertained through population-based studies (P for difference = .41). On the basis of the combined data, the estimated risks to age 80 years were 53% (95% CI, 44% to 63%) for female breast cancer, 5% (95% CI, 2% to 10%) for ovarian cancer, 2%-3% (95% CI females, 1% to 4%; 95% CI males, 2% to 5%) for pancreatic cancer, and 1% (95% CI, 0.2% to 5%) for male breast cancer.

CONCLUSION

These results confirm PALB2 as a major breast cancer susceptibility gene and establish substantial associations between germline PALB2 PVs and ovarian, pancreatic, and male breast cancers. These findings will facilitate incorporation of PALB2 into risk prediction models and optimize the clinical cancer risk management of PALB2 PV carriers.

Guidelines for the management of hereditary colorectal cancer from the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG)/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI)/United Kingdom Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG)

Heritable factors account for approximately 35% of colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, and almost 30% of the population in the UK have a family history of CRC. The quantification of an individual's lifetime risk of gastrointestinal cancer may incorporate clinical and molecular data, and depends on accurate phenotypic assessment and genetic diagnosis. In turn this may facilitate targeted risk-reducing interventions, including endoscopic surveillance, preventative surgery and chemoprophylaxis, which provide opportunities for cancer prevention. This guideline is an update from the 2010 British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (BSG/ACPGBI) guidelines for colorectal screening and surveillance in moderate and high-risk groups; however, this guideline is concerned specifically with people who have increased lifetime risk of CRC due to hereditary factors, including those with Lynch syndrome, polyposis or a family history of CRC. On this occasion we invited the UK Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG), a subgroup within the British Society of Genetic Medicine (BSGM), as a partner to BSG and ACPGBI in the multidisciplinary guideline development process. We also invited external review through the Delphi process by members of the public as well as the steering committees of the European Hereditary Tumour Group (EHTG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). A systematic review of 10 189 publications was undertaken to develop 67 evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations for the management of hereditary CRC risk. Ten research recommendations are also prioritised to inform clinical management of people at hereditary CRC risk.

Comparison of BRCA versus non-BRCA germline mutations and associated somatic mutation profiles in patients with unselected breast cancer

The data on the phenotypes associated with some rare germline mutations in Chinese breast cancer patients are limited. The difference in somatic mutation profiles in breast cancer patients with germline BRCA and non-BRCA mutations remains unexplored. We interrogated the germline and somatic mutational profile of 524 Chinese breast cancer patients with various stages unselected for predisposing factors using a panel consisting of 520 cancer-related genes including 62 cancer susceptibility genes. We divided the patients into three groups according to germline mutations: Germline-BRCA1/2, Germline-others (non-BRCA) and Others (non-carriers). A total of 58 patients (11.1%) carried 76 likely pathogenic or pathogenic (LP/P) germline variants in 15 cancer predisposition genes. Germline BRCA1/2 mutations were detected from 29 (5.53%) patients; with 11 (2.10%) BRCA1 carriers and 18 (3.44%) BRCA2 carriers. In addition, LP/P germline mutations were detected in other genes including MUTYH (n=4), PALB2 (n=4), ATM (n=3), BRIP1 (n=3), CDH1 (n=3), RAD51C (n=3), CHEK2 (n=2), FANCA (n=2), PMS2 (n=2), TP53 (n=2), FANCI (n=1), FANCL (n=1) and PTEN (n=1). At least one variant of uncertain significance (VUS) was identified in 490 (93.5%) patients. Young age (P=0.011), premenopausal status (P=0.013), and breast/ovarian cancer family history (P=0.001) were correlated with germline mutations. Germline-BRCA1/2 group was detected with more missense (P=0.02) and less copy-number amplification (P=0.04) than Germline-others group. Meanwhile, Germline-others group and Others group are very similar (P>0.05). The mutation rates of AKT1, CCND1, FGFR1, and PIK3CA were different among the three groups. By investigating all breast and ovarian cancer-related genes listed in the US genetic guidelines, we identified 15 cancer susceptibility genes frequently mutated in the germline of our population and must be included in cancer predisposition screening. Our study contributed a better understanding of the tumor characteristics of patients with LP/P germline mutations.

Genetic Predisposition to Breast and Ovarian Cancers: How Many and Which Genes to Test?

Breast and ovarian cancers are some of the most common tumors in females, and the genetic predisposition is emerging as one of the key risk factors in the development of these two malignancies. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are the best-known genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. However, recent advances in molecular techniques, Next-Generation Sequencing in particular, have led to the identification of many new genes involved in the predisposition to breast and/or ovarian cancer, with different penetrance estimates. TP53, PTEN, STK11, and CDH1 have been identified as high penetrance genes for the risk of breast/ovarian cancers. Besides them, PALB2, BRIP1, ATM, CHEK2, BARD1, NBN, NF1, RAD51C, RAD51D and mismatch repair genes have been recognized as moderate and low penetrance genes, along with other genes encoding proteins involved in the same pathways, possibly associated with breast/ovarian cancer risk. In this review, we summarize the past and more recent findings in the field of cancer predisposition genes, with insights into the role of the encoded proteins and the associated genetic disorders. Furthermore, we discuss the possible clinical utility of genetic testing in terms of prevention protocols and therapeutic approaches.