Genetic Counseling, Testing, and Management of HBOC in India: An Expert Consensus Document from Indian Society of Medical and Pediatric Oncology

Current practices and challenges in genetic testing and counseling for women with breast and ovarian cancer in Asia

AIM

This study assesses current practices and challenges in genetic testing and counseling (GT and C) for breast cancer gene (BRCA)1/2 mutations in Asia, considering the increased risk of ovarian cancer (OC) and breast cancer (BC) in women carrying these mutations.

METHODS

Insights were gathered through a questionnaire from breast surgeons, gynecologists, oncologists, and genetic clinicians in 10 Asian countries: Thailand, Hong Kong, South Korea, India, Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, Singapore, and Indonesia. The questionnaire covered their knowledge, attitudes, and practices in GT and C for BRCA1/2 mutations, along with information on perceived gaps and unmet needs in the region.

RESULTS

A total of 61 specialists participated in the survey. GT and C for BRCA1/2 mutations were less frequently offered in Asia compared to Western countries. Among the guidelines used, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines alone or in combination with other guidelines (American Society of Clinical Oncology [ASCO], National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence [NICE], and European Society for Medical Oncology [ESMO]) were preferred for both BC and OC. Limited access to genetic counselors posed a significant challenge, resulting in delayed or no GT. Pretest genetic counseling was provided by the respondents themselves. Germline testing was preferred for BC, whereas both germline and somatic testing were preferred for OC, with the most preferred option being a multipanel germline test.

CONCLUSION

Disparities exist in GT and C practices between Asian and Western countries. To address this, steps, such as patient and doctor education, increased accessibility and affordability of GT and C services, and improved infrastructure for identifying gene mutations, should be taken.

Application of genetic testing criteria for hereditary breast cancer in South Africa

PURPOSE

Breast cancer (BC) is the commonest cancer in South African women. A proportion are associated with a pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) variant in a BC susceptibility gene. Clinical guidelines for genetic testing are used to optimise variant detection while containing costs. We assessed the detection rate in women of diverse ancestries who met the South African National Department of Health (NDOH) testing guidelines, and analysed relationships between testing criteria, participant characteristics and presence of a BRCA1/2 P/LP variant.

METHODS

Records from 376 women with BC who met NDOH criteria and had genetic testing were included. Demographic, clinical and test result data were collated to describe detection rates according to criteria met, and a multivariate analysis conducted to find variables most frequently associated with a P/LP variant.

RESULTS

P/LP variant prevalence in women meeting NDOH testing criteria was 19.9% (75/376). Women meeting ≥ 2 guideline criteria were over twice as likely to have a P/LP variant (OR 2.27, 95%CI 1.27-4.07, p = 0.006), highlighting the guidelines' capacity to stratify risk. Family history (OR 1.97; 95%CI 1.05-3.70, p = 0.03) and Black African ancestry (OR 2.58; 95%CI 1.28-5.18, p < 0.01) were independently associated with having a BRCA1/2 P/LP variant when controlling for other variables. Notably, although Black African participants were less likely to report a family history, those that did had higher odds of a P/LP variant in BRCA1/2.

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrate the usefulness of the NDOH guidelines in women of diverse ancestries and provide insight into the factors associated with P/LP variants in understudied African populations.

Screening and Testing for Homologous Recombination Repair Deficiency (HRD) in Breast Cancer: an Overview of the Current Global Landscape

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Homologous recombination repair deficiency (HRD) increases breast cancer susceptibility and influences both prophylactic and active management of breast cancer. This review evaluates HRD testing and the therapeutic implications of HRD in a global context.

RECENT FINDINGS

Ongoing research efforts have highlighted the importance of HRD beyond BRCA1/2 as a potential therapeutic target in breast cancer. However, despite the improved affordability of next-generation sequencing (NGS) and the discovery of PARP inhibitors, economic and geographical barriers in access to HRD testing and breast cancer screening do not allow all patients to benefit from the personalized treatment approach they provide. Advancements in HRD testing modalities and targeted therapeutics enable tailored breast cancer management. However, inequalities in access to testing and optimized treatments are contributing to widening health disparities globally.

Expert consensus: Profiling and management of advanced or metastatic epithelial ovarian cancer

Introduction and objective: The approach to patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has evolved over time with the advent of new therapies and multimodal strategies. The objective of this consensus of experts is to generate national recommendations for the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic high-grade OEC, defined as stages III and IV of the “The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification at the time of diagnosis to base on the literature review that included international evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Material and methods: Eleven panelists (oncologists and gynecological oncologists) answered 8 questions about the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic ovarian epithelial carcinoma. The panelists were chosen for their academic profile and influence in national health institutions. Guidelines from the “ESMO Standardized Operating Procedures Consensus Conference” were used to develop the consensus. It was agreed that the level of agreement to accept a recommendation should be ≥ 80%. The document was peer reviewed. Results: Eight general recommendations are made, which are presented into five domains. Some of these recommendations are subdivided into specific recommendations. Initial treatment Recommendation 1.1 Complete primary cytoreduction (PCS) surgery is suggested as the initial therapy of choice for patients with high-grade or metastatic EOC, which should ideally be carried out in centers with experience, followed by adjuvant therapy. 1.2 Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreduction surgery (ICS) is suggested in those who are unlikely to achieve a complete cytoreduction in PCS either due to unresectable metastatic disease or who present unresectability criteria (imaging, laparoscopic and/or by laparotomy) and that have been defined by a gynecological oncologist and patients with poor functional status and comorbidities according to the criteria of the multidisciplinary team (clinical oncology, gynecological oncology, radiology, etc.). Recommendation 2. In patients with high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), in stage III locally advanced or metastatic, who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and achieved a complete or partial response (cytoreduction with tumor residue < 2.5 mm), the use of Hyperthermic IntraPeritoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) could be considered as an alternative to standard platinum-based adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy during interval cytoreductive surgery, after discussion in a multidisciplinary tumor board, at a center experienced in treating this type of patients. Use of genetic testing. Recommendation 3. It is suggested at the time of diagnosis to offer molecular genetic testing to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC regardless of family history. Recommendation 4. It is suggested to offer genetic counseling, by qualified personnel, to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC who are ordered genetic testing. Recommendation 5. It is suggested that all patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade EOC undergo a germ panel that includes the Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes 1/2 genes (BRCA 1/2) and the other susceptibility genes according to with institutional protocols and the availability of genetic testing panels; If it is negative, then somatic testing should be performed that includes the homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status, regardless of family history. Adjuvant Therapy Recommendation 6. 6.1. It is suggested that all patients with advanced stage III/IV EOC, with PSC of (0-2), got adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy as standard treatment within six weeks after Prc. It is suggested paclitaxel/carboplatin. Recommendation 6.2. It is suggested to use standard chemotherapy base on platinum plus Bevacizumab as adjuvant chemotherapy to patients with high-risk disease (EOC stage IV or stage III with suboptimal tumor cytoreduction), following by bevacizumab as maintenance. The use of bevacizumab as maintenance therapy is not recommended if bevacizumab was not included in the first line of treatment. We suggested the dose used in GOG-0218 and ICON7 trials. Recommendation 6.3 It is suggested combined intravenous/intraperitoneal chemotherapy only for selected patients, with optimal cytoreduction (residual lesions < 1 cm), especially those without residual disease (R0) and who are evaluated in a multidisciplinary meeting. It is not considered standard treatment. Recommendation 6.4. 6.4.1 It is suggested to use Poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors such as olaparib or niraparib as maintenance after receiving first-line chemotherapy in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinumbased chemotherapy and obtained complete response/partial response (CR/PR), 6.4.2 It is suggested to use olaparib alone or in combination with bevacizumab or niraparib in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.3 It is suggested to use niraparibin patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.4 It is suggested to use bevacizumab or olaparib plus bevacizumab in patients with EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown (HRD positive) who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and obtained CR/PR. Treatment of disease relapse Recommendation 7. Secondary cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy is suggested for selected patients with high-grade advanced EOC in first relapse, platinum-sensitive (platinum-free interval ≥ 6 months), positive “Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie – AGO” score or “I-model” positive (< 4.7) with a potential resection to R0 in centers with access to optimal surgical and postoperative support. Note: Platinum-free interval and AGO score have only been developed as positive predictors of complete resection and not to exclude patients from surgery. Recommendation 8. 8.1 For patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC platinum-sensitive, the following is suggested: Platinum-based combination chemotherapy: carboplatin/liposomal doxorubicin or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel or carboplatin/docetaxel or carboplatin/gemcitabine) for six cycles. If combination therapy is not tolerated, give carboplatin or cisplatin alone. Combination chemotherapy (carboplatin/gemcitabine or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/doxorubicin liposomal) plus bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab as maintenance (until progression or toxicity). Recommendation 8.2 For patients with relapsed advanced high-grade EOC platinum-resistant, it is suggested: Sequential treatment with chemotherapy, preferably with a non-platinum single agent (weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or docetaxel or oral etoposide or gemcitabine or trabectidine or, topotecan). Weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or topotecan could be administrate with or without bevacizumab. Other agents are considered potentially active (capecitabine, cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, pemetrexed, vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide) could be recommended for later lines. Hormone receptor-positive patients who do not tolerate or have no response to cytotoxic regimens may receive hormone therapy with tamoxifen or other agents, including aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole and letrozole) or leuprolide acetate, or megestrol acetate. Patients with a performance score ≥ 3 should be considered only for best supportive care. Recommendation 8.3 Maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors: It is suggested in patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 (positive, negative or unknown) who have received two or more lines of platinum-based chemotherapy and have achieved CR/PR, use olaparib, niraparib or rucaparib. Niraparib could be useful in BRCA 1/2 +/-/unknown patients, as rucaparib, however, the latter does not yet have approval from the regulatory office in Colombia. Conclusions: It is expected that the recommendations issued in this consensus will contribute to improving clinical care, oncological impact, and quality of life of these women.

Global Increase in Breast Cancer Incidence: Risk Factors and Preventive Measures

Breast cancer is a global cause for concern owing to its high incidence around the world. The alarming increase in breast cancer cases emphasizes the management of disease at multiple levels. The management should start from the beginning that includes stringent cancer screening or cancer registry to effective diagnostic and treatment strategies. Breast cancer is highly heterogeneous at morphology as well as molecular levels and needs different therapeutic regimens based on the molecular subtype. Breast cancer patients with respective subtype have different clinical outcome prognoses. Breast cancer heterogeneity emphasizes the advanced molecular testing that will help on-time diagnosis and improved survival. Emerging fields such as liquid biopsy and artificial intelligence would help to under the complexity of breast cancer disease and decide the therapeutic regimen that helps in breast cancer management. In this review, we have discussed various risk factors and advanced technology available for breast cancer diagnosis to combat the worst breast cancer status and areas that need to be focused for the better management of breast cancer.

Prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations Among Patients With Ovarian, Primary Peritoneal, and Fallopian Tube Cancer in India: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study

PURPOSE

There are deficient data on prevalence of germline mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes 1 and 2 (BRCA1/BRCA2) in Indian patients with ovarian cancer who are not selected by clinical features.

METHODS

This prospective, cross-sectional, noninterventional study in nine Indian centers included patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer. The primary objective was to assess the prevalence of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations, and the secondary objective was to correlate BRCA1/BRCA2 status with clinicopathologic characteristics. Mutation testing was performed by a standard next-generation sequencing assay.

RESULTS

Between March 2018 and December 2018, 239 patients with a median age of 53.0 (range, 23.0-86.0 years) years were included, of whom 203 (84.9%) had newly diagnosed disease, 36 (15.1%) had family history of ovarian or breast cancer, and 159 (66.5%) had serous subtype of epithelial ovarian cancer. Germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 were detected in 37 (15.5%; 95% CI, 11.1 to 20.7) and 14 (5.9%; 95% CI, 3.2 to 9.6) patients, respectively, whereas variants of uncertain significance in these genes were seen in four (1.7%; 95% CI, 0.5 to 4.2) and six (2.5%; 95% CI, 0.9 to 5.4) patients, respectively. The prevalence of pathogenic or likely pathogenic BRCA mutations in patients with serous versus nonserous tumors, with versus without relevant family history, and ≤ 50 years versus > 50 years, were 40 of 159 (25.2%; 95% CI, 18.6 to 32.6) versus 11 of 80 (13.8%; 95% CI, 7.1 to 23.3; P = .0636), 20 of 36 (55.6%; 95% CI, 38.1 to 72.1) versus 41 of 203 (20.2%; 95% CI, 14.9 to 26.4; P < .0001), and 20 of 90 (22.2%; 95% CI, 14.1 to 32.2) versus 31 of 149 (20.8%; 95% CI, 14.6 to 28.2; P = .7956), respectively.

CONCLUSION

There is a high prevalence of pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline BRCA mutations in Indian patients with ovarian cancer.