Oncology clinic-based germline genetic testing for exocrine pancreatic cancer enables timely return of results and unveils low uptake of cascade testing

Update on Genetic Counselor Practice and Recommendations for Pediatric Cancer Predisposition Evaluation and Surveillance

In July 2023, the American Association for Cancer Research held the second Childhood Cancer Predisposition Workshop, at which international experts in pediatric cancer predisposition met to update the previously published 2017 consensus statements on pediatric cancer predisposition syndromes. Since 2017, advances in tumor and germline genetic testing and increased understanding of cancer predisposition in patients with pediatric cancer have led to significant changes in clinical care. Here, we provide an updated genetic counseling framework for pediatric oncology professionals. The framework includes referral indications and timing, somatic and germline genetic testing options, testing for adult-onset cancer predisposition syndromes in children with and without cancer, evolving genetic counseling models to meet the increased demand for genetic testing, barriers to cancer genetic testing and surveillance in children, and psychosocial and equity considerations regarding cancer genetic testing and surveillance in children. Adaptable genetic counseling services are needed to provide support to pediatric oncology provider teams and diverse patients with pediatric cancer, cancer predisposition, and their families.

Development of a Novel Protocol for Germline Testing in Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Guidelines now recommend universal germline genetic testing (GGT) for all pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients. Testing provides information on actionable pathogenic variants and guides management of patients and family. Since traditional genetic counseling (GC) models are time-intensive and GC resources are sparse, new approaches are needed to comply with guidelines without overwhelming available resources.

METHODS

A novel protocol was developed for physician-led GGT. Completed test kits were delivered to the GC team, who maintained a prospective database and mailed all orders. If results revealed pathogenic variants for PDAC, patients were offered comprehensive GC, whereas negative and variant of uncertain significance (VUS) test results were reported to patients via brief calls.

RESULTS

During protocol implementation between January 2020 and December 2022, 310 (81.5%) patients underwent GGT, with a physician compliance rate of 82.6% and patient compliance rate of 98.7%. Of 310 patients tested, 44 (14.2%) patients had detection of pathogenic variants, while 83 (26.8%) patients had VUS. Pathogenic variants included BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 (n = 18, 5.8%), ATM (n = 9, 2.9%), CFTR (n = 4, 1.3%), EPCAM/MLH1/MSH2/MSH6/PMS2 (n = 3, 1.0%), and CDKN2A (n = 2, 0.7%). The GC team successfully contacted all patients with pathogenic variants to discuss results and offer comprehensive GC.

CONCLUSION

Our novel protocol facilitated GGT with excellent compliance despite limited GC resources. This framework for GGT allocates GC resources to those patients who would benefit most from GC. As we continue to expand the program, we seek to implement methods to ensure compliance with cascade testing of high-risk family members.

Utilization and Outcomes of Multigene Panel Testing in Patients With Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Guidelines recommend germline genetic testing (GT) for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study aims to evaluate the utilization and outcomes of multigene panel GT in patients with PDAC.

METHODS

This retrospective, multisite study included patients with PDAC diagnosed between May 2018 and August 2020 at Mayo Clinic Arizona, Florida, and Minnesota. Discussion, uptake, and outcomes of GT were compared before (May 1, 2018-May 1, 2019) and after (August 1, 2019-August 1, 2020) the guideline update, accounting for a transition period.

RESULTS

The study identified 533 patients with PDAC, with 321 (60.2%) preguideline and 212 (39.8%) postguideline. Patient characteristics did not differ between the preguideline and postguideline periods. GT was discussed in 34.3% (110 of 321) of preguideline and 39.6% (84 of 212) of postguideline patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.26 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.80]) and subsequently performed in 80.9% (89 of 110) of preguideline and 75.0% (63 of 84) of postguideline patients (OR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.61]). Of 152 tested patients, 26 (17.1%) had a pathogenic variant (PV), of whom 17 (11.2%; 17 of 152) were PDAC-associated. Over the entire study period, GT was more likely in younger patients (65 v 70 years; P < .001), those seen by a medical oncologist (82.9% v 69.0%; P < .001), and those surviving more than 12 months from diagnosis (70.4% v 43.4%; P < .001). Demographics and personal/family cancer history were comparable between patients with and without a PDAC PV.

CONCLUSION

GT remains underutilized despite National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline recommendations. Given the poor prognosis of PDAC and potential implications of GT, efforts to increase utilization are needed to provide surveillance and support to both patients with PDAC and at-risk family members.

Genetic and other risk factors for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is often diagnosed at an advanced stage, resulting in poor prognosis and low 5-year survival rates. While early evidence suggests increased long-term survival in those with screen-detected resectable cancers, surveillance imaging is currently only recommended for individuals with a lifetime risk of PDAC ≥ 5%. Identification of risk factors for PDAC provides opportunities for early detection, risk reducing interventions, and targeted therapies, thus potentially improving patient outcomes. Here, we summarize modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors for PDAC. We review hereditary cancer syndromes associated with risk for PDAC and their implications for patients and their relatives. In addition, other biologically relevant pathways and environmental and lifestyle risk factors are discussed. Future work may focus on elucidating additional genetic, environmental, and lifestyle risk factors that may modify PDAC risk to continue to identify individuals at increased risk for PDAC who may benefit from surveillance and risk reducing interventions.

Improving Access to Hereditary Testing in Pancreatic Ductal Carcinoma

PURPOSE

Approximately 5%-10% of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have an inherited basis, yet uptake of genetic testing remains low and subject to disparities. This study compared two genetic testing pathways available to patients referred to a provincial cancer center, BC Cancer: a traditional hereditary cancer clinic-initiated testing (HCT) pathway and a new oncology clinic-initiated testing (OCT) pathway.

METHODS

Study subjects were patients with confirmed PDAC referred for genetic testing through the HCT or OCT pathway between June 1, 2020, and February 1, 2022. Charts were retrospectively reviewed for patient characteristics and testing outcomes.

RESULTS

The study population was 397 patients (HCT, n = 279 and OCT, n = 118). OCT patients were more likely to have non-European ethnicity compared with HCT patients (41.9% v 25.6%, P = .004), to have earlier-stage disease (P = .012), and to have better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status than the HCT group (P = .001). A total of 306 patients completed testing (77%). OCT patients had higher test completion rates than HCT patients (odds ratio, 3.74 [95% CI, 1.66 to 9.62]). Median time for results was shorter in OCT than in HCT (53 days [IQR, 44-76] v 107 days [IQR, 63.8-158.3]). Pancreatic cancer susceptibility pathogenic gene variants were identified in 8.5% (26/306).

CONCLUSION

The real-world observations in our study show that oncology clinic-initiated hereditary testing is more effective and faster than testing through hereditary cancer clinic referrals and reaches a more ethnically diverse population. This has important implications for publicly funded environments with limited resources for genetic counseling.

Family Recall of and Response to Germline Pathologic Variants Found on Paired Tumor-Germline Sequencing in Pediatric Oncology

PURPOSE

Paired tumor-germline sequencing can identify somatic variants for targeted therapy and germline pathogenic variants (GPVs) causative of hereditary cancer/tumor predisposition syndromes. It is unknown how patients/families in pediatric oncology use information about an identified GPV. We assessed recall of germline results and actions taken on the basis of findings.

METHODS

We completed phone surveys with patients (and/or their parent) with GPVs identified via a single academic medical center's paired tumor-germline sequencing study. Seven hundred forty pediatric (aged 0-25 years) oncology patients were enrolled in this sequencing study between May 2012 and August 2021. Ninety-six participants (13.0%) had at least one GPV identified and were therefore eligible for this survey. The parent/guardian (for patients younger than 18 years or deceased patients) or patients themselves (if 18 years or older) were contacted. Survey topics included germline result recall, experience with genetic counseling, changes to patient's cancer treatment/screening, sharing of results with family members, and lifestyle changes.

RESULTS

Fifty-three surveys (response rate, 55.2%) were completed between October 2021 and June 2022. Thirty-seven (69.8%) respondents correctly recalled the identified GPV. Discussing results with a genetic counselor (P = .0001), having a GPV related to the cancer/tumor diagnosis (P = .002), and non-Hispanic White race/ethnicity (P = .02) were associated with accurate recall. Twenty-five respondents (47.2%) reported a change in the child's cancer treatment and/or screening recommendations, 17 respondents (32.1%) made a lifestyle change on the basis of the results, and 44 respondents (83.0%) shared results with at least one family member.

CONCLUSION

While most respondents remembered that a GPV was identified in the patient, some did not recall having a GPV found, and others recalled germline findings incorrectly. Future work may determine patient/family preferences for timing/method of result return to optimize patient recall and use of germline results.

Understanding the Genetic Landscape of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma to Support Personalized Medicine: A Systematic Review

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most fatal malignancies worldwide. While population-wide screening recommendations for PDAC in asymptomatic individuals are not achievable due to its relatively low incidence, pancreatic cancer surveillance programs are recommended for patients with germline causative variants in PDAC susceptibility genes or a strong family history. In this study, we sought to determine the prevalence and significance of germline alterations in major genes (ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDKN2A, EPCAM, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PALB2, PMS2, STK11, TP53) involved in PDAC susceptibility. We performed a systematic review of PubMed publications reporting germline variants identified in these genes in PDAC patients. Overall, the retrieved articles included 1493 PDAC patients. A high proportion of these patients (n = 1225/1493, 82%) were found to harbor alterations in genes (ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2) involved in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway. Specifically, the remaining PDAC patients were reported to carry alterations in genes playing a role in other cancer pathways (CDKN2A, STK11, TP53; n = 181/1493, 12.1%) or in the mismatch repair (MMR) pathway (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2; n = 87/1493, 5.8%). Our findings highlight the importance of germline genetic characterization in PDAC patients for better personalized targeted therapies, clinical management, and surveillance.

Germline BRCA testing in pancreatic cancer: improving awareness, timing, turnaround, and uptake

Prognosis is generally poor for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. However, patients with germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations (gBRCAm) may benefit from first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and maintenance therapy with the poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib following at least 16 weeks of first-line platinum-based chemotherapy without disease progression. Germline breast cancer gene (BRCA) testing is therefore important to ensure that patients receive the most effective treatment. In addition, testing for other DNA damage response gene mutations beyond gBRCAm may also guide treatment decisions. However, clinical pathways for genetic testing are often suboptimal, leading to delays in treatment initiation or missed opportunities for personalized therapy. Barriers to testing include low rates of referral and uptake, delays to referral and slow result turnaround times, cost, and biopsy and assay limitations if somatic testing is performed, leading to the requirement for subsequent dedicated germline testing. Low rates of referral may result from lack of awareness among physicians of the clinical value of testing, coupled with low confidence in interpreting test results and poor availability of genetic counseling services. Among patients, barriers to uptake may include similar lack of awareness of the clinical value of testing, anxiety regarding the implications of test results, lack of insurance coverage, fear of negative insurance implications, and socioeconomic factors. Potential solutions include innovative approaches to testing pathways, including 'mainstreaming' of testing in which BRCA tests are routinely arranged by the treating oncologist, with the involvement of genetic counselors if a patient is found to have a gBRCAm. More recently, the utility of multigene panel analyses has also been explored. Access to genetic counseling may also be improved through initiatives such as having a genetic counseling appointment for all new patient visits and telemedicine approaches, including the use of telephone consultations or DVD-assisted counseling. Educational programs will also be beneficial, and cost effectiveness is likely to improve as the number of targeted treatments increases and when the earlier detection of tumors in family members following cascade testing is considered.

Prevalence of Germline Mutations in Cancer Predisposition Genes in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer or Suspected Related Hereditary Syndromes: Historical Prospective Analysis

We investigate the prevalence of germline mutations in cancer predisposition genes in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) or suspected related hereditary syndromes.

METHODS

we enrolled for NGS with an Illumina TrueSight Cancer panel comprising 19 CPGs and 113 consecutive subjects referred to cancer genetic clinics for metastatic PDAC, early onset PDAC, suspected hereditary syndrome, or positive family history.

RESULTS

Overall, 23 (20.1%) subjects were carriers of 24 pathogenetic variants (PVs). We found 9 variants in BRCA2 (37.5%), 6 in CDKN2A (25%), 3 in ATM (12.5%), 2 in BRCA1 (8.3%), 1 in CHEK2 (4.1%), 1 in PALB2 (4.1%), 1 in MITF (4.1%), and 1 in FANCM (4.1%). A double PV (BRCA1 plus BRCA2) was found in 1 subject. We observed a nearly 30% (16/55) mutational rate in the subgroup of subjects tested for the suspected syndromes (PDAC and other synchronous or metachronous tumors or an indicative family history), and the frequency was significantly higher than that in patients with only metastatic PDAC (p = 0.05). In our cohort, 39 variants of unknown significance (VUS) were identified, most of which (16/39, 41%) in genes belonging to the Lynch syndrome spectrum.

CONCLUSION

A clinically relevant proportion of pancreatic cancer is associated with mutations in known predisposition genes. Guidelines instructing on an adequate selection for accessing genetic testing are eagerly needed. The heterogeneity of mutations identified in this study reinforces the value of using a multiple-gene panel in pancreatic cancer.

Outcomes of Universal Point-of-Care Genetic Testing in Diverse Patients With Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Guidelines recommend all patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) undergo germline genetic testing (GT). Rates of recommendation and completion of GT among diverse patients with PDAC are not known. The aim was to determine rates of recommendation and completion of point-of-care GT in diverse patients with PDAC.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients with PDAC seen at an academic center between April 2019 and December 2020 was performed. Recommendation, completion and results of point-of-care GT, and demographic and clinical factors were recorded. Univariate and multivariate analyses of GT were performed using the chi-square test and logistic regression.

RESULTS

In total, 579 patients with PDAC were included. The median age at diagnosis was 67 years; 52% were male; 63% were non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients, and 20% were African American (AA) patients. GT was performed in 216 (37%) patients. Of those tested, 47 (22%) had a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant identified of which 25 (12%) were in PDAC-associated genes. On multivariate analysis, age, NHW race, personal and family cancer history, medical oncology visit, and number of visits were independent predictors of GT completion. AA patients had significantly lower rates of recommendation and completion of GT compared with NHW patients.

CONCLUSION

Point-of-care GT in patients with PDAC is unacceptably low, especially among AA patients. Testing disparity might be due to lack of provider recommendation more than patient uptake. Lack of testing leads to missed opportunities for potential targeted therapies, improved outcomes, and identification of at-risk family members who could potentially benefit from surveillance.

Systems approach to enhance Lynch syndrome diagnosis through tumour testing

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend universal mismatch repair (MMR) tumour testing of colorectal adenocarcinomas (CRCs) to screen for Lynch syndrome (LS). However, its implementation remains disjointed and referral for genetic testing dismal, particularly among minorities. We aimed to increase referral, cancer genetic testing and eventually LS diagnosis by developing the CLEAR LS (Closed Loop Enhanced Assessment and Referral for Lynch Syndrome) intervention, a systems approach which in the second phase was automated.

METHODS

This is a cohort study of all patients diagnosed with CRC at an academic centre between 1 January 2012, when implementation of universal CRC testing began, and 31 January 2021. The original cohort spanned through 31 May 2015. Tumour testing included MMR immunohistochemistry, followed by BRAF V600E/MLH1 promoter methylation testing when indicated. The intervention included a manual phase (1 June 2015 through 31 July 2018), which systematised pathology screening and cancer genetics (CG) referral mechanisms, and an automated phase (1 August 2018 through 31 January 2021) using computer programming.

RESULTS

A total of 249/1541 CRC (17.38%) had MMR loss of expression and 129 (8.37%) qualified for CG evaluation. Referral was 27.58% in the original cohort and 92.1% in the intervention (p<0.001). Patients seen by CG among referred were 27.58% in the original cohort and 74.3% in the intervention (p two-sided<0.001). The distribution of race/ethnicity among patients qualifying and referred for CG evaluation was not significantly different across cohorts. LS diagnosis increased from 0.56% (original cohort) to 1.43% (intervention). Cost per new diagnosis of LS decreased from US$173 675 to $87 960 from original cohort to intervention.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of systematic case identification and referral support mechanisms significantly increased the proportion of patients undergoing genetic testing and doubled the percentage of patients diagnosed with LS with no referral differences across racial/ethnic groups.

Impact of comprehensive family history and genetic analysis in the multidisciplinary pancreatic tumor clinic setting

BACKGROUND

Genetic testing is recommended for all pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients. Prior research demonstrates that multidisciplinary pancreatic cancer clinics (MDPCs) improve treatment- and survival-related outcomes for PDAC patients. However, limited information exists regarding the utility of integrated genetics in the MDPC setting. We hypothesized that incorporating genetics in an MDPC serving both PDAC patients and high-risk individuals (HRI) could: (1) improve compliance with guideline-based genetic testing for PDAC patients, and (2) optimize HRI identification and PDAC surveillance participation to improve early detection and survival.

METHODS

Demographics, genetic testing results, and pedigrees were reviewed for PDAC patients and HRI at one institution over 45 months. Genetic testing analyzed 16 PDAC-associated genes at minimum.

RESULTS

Overall, 969 MDPC subjects were evaluated during the study period; another 56 PDAC patients were seen outside the MDPC. Among 425 MDPC PDAC patients, 333 (78.4%) completed genetic testing; 29 (8.7%) carried a PDAC-related pathogenic germline variant (PGV). Additionally, 32 (9.6%) met familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) criteria. These PDAC patients had 191 relatives eligible for surveillance or genetic testing. Only 2/56 (3.6%) non-MDPC PDAC patients completed genetic testing (p < 0.01). Among 544 HRI, 253 (46.5%) had a known PGV or a designation of FPC, and were eligible for surveillance at baseline; of the remainder, 15/291 (5.2%) were eligible following genetic testing and PGV identification.

CONCLUSION

Integrating genetics into the multidisciplinary setting significantly improved genetic testing compliance by reducing logistical barriers for PDAC patients, and clarified cancer risks for their relatives while conserving clinical resources. Overall, we identified 206 individuals newly eligible for surveillance or genetic testing (191 relatives of MDPC PDAC patients, and 15 HRI from this cohort), enabling continuity of care for PDAC patients and at-risk relatives in one clinic.

Gynecologic Cancer Risk and Genetics: Informing an Ideal Model of Gynecologic Cancer Prevention

Individuals with proven hereditary cancer syndrome (HCS) such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 have elevated rates of ovarian, breast, and other cancers. If these high-risk people can be identified before a cancer is diagnosed, risk-reducing interventions are highly effective and can be lifesaving. Despite this evidence, the vast majority of Canadians with HCS are unaware of their risk. In response to this unmet opportunity for prevention, the British Columbia Gynecologic Cancer Initiative convened a research summit “Gynecologic Cancer Prevention: Thinking Big, Thinking Differently” in Vancouver, Canada on 26 November 2021. The aim of the conference was to explore how hereditary cancer prevention via population-based genetic testing could decrease morbidity and mortality from gynecologic cancer. The summit invited local, national, and international experts to (1) discuss how genetic testing could be more broadly implemented in a Canadian system, (2) identify key research priorities in this topic and (3) outline the core essential elements required for such a program to be successful. This report summarizes the findings from this research summit, describes the current state of hereditary genetic programs in Canada, and outlines incremental steps that can be taken to improve prevention for high-risk Canadians now while developing an organized population-based hereditary cancer strategy.

Feasibility of a Traceback Approach for Using Pathology Specimens to Facilitate Genetic Testing in the Genetic Risk Analysis in Ovarian Cancer (GRACE) Study Protocol

Guidelines currently state that genetic testing is clinically indicated for all individuals diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Individuals with a prior diagnosis of ovarian cancer who have not received genetic testing represent missed opportunities to identify individuals with inherited high-risk cancer variants. For deceased individuals, post-mortem genetic testing of pathology specimens allows surviving family members to receive important genetic risk information. The Genetic Risk Assessment in Ovarian Cancer (GRACE) study aims to address this significant healthcare gap using a "traceback testing" approach to identify individuals with a prior diagnosis of ovarian cancer and offer genetic risk information to them and their family members. This study will assess the potential ethical and privacy concerns related to an ovarian cancer traceback testing approach in the context of patients who are deceased, followed by implementation and evaluation of the feasibility of an ovarian cancer traceback testing approach using tumor registries and archived pathology tissue. Descriptive and statistical analyses will assess health system and patient characteristics associated with the availability of pathology tissue and compare the ability to contact and uptake of genetic testing between patients who are living and deceased. The results of this study will inform the implementation of future traceback programs.