Genetic risk assessment and prevention: the role of genetic testing panels in breast cancer

Recontact to return new or updated PALB2 genetic results in the clinical laboratory setting

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to recontact individuals with clinically actionable test results identified through a retrospective research study and to provide a framework for laboratories to recontact patients.

METHODS

Genetic testing was conducted on 2977 individuals originally referred for BRCA1 and BRCA2 hereditary breast and ovarian cancer testing that had a negative genetic test result. A gene panel was used to identify pathogenic variants in known or newly discovered genes that could explain the underlying cause of disease; however, analysis was restricted to PALB2 for the purposes of this study. A patient recontact decision tree was developed to assist in the returning of updated genetic test results to clinics and patients.

RESULTS

Novel clinically actionable pathogenic variants were identified in the PALB2 gene in 18 participants (0.6%), the majority of whom were recontacted with their new or updated genetic test results. Eight individuals were unable to be recontacted; five individuals had already learnt about their new or updated findings from genetic testing outside the context of this study; three individuals prompted cascade testing in family members; two individuals were deceased.

CONCLUSION

Novel pathogenic variants in PALB2 were identified in 18 individuals through retrospective gene panel testing. Recontacting these individuals regarding these new or updated findings had a range of outcomes. The process of conveying genomic results within this framework can be effectively accomplished while upholding patient autonomy, potentially leading to advantageous outcomes for patients and their families.

Economic evaluation of germline genetic testing for breast cancer in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer affecting women globally. Genetic testing serves as a prevention and treatment strategy for managing BC. This study aims to systematically review economic evaluations and the quality of selected studies involving genetic screening strategies for BC in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS

A search was performed to identify related articles that were published up to April 2023 on PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Only English-language LMIC studies were included. Synthesis of studies characteristics, methodological and data input variations, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and reporting quality (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklist) were performed.

RESULTS

This review found five pertinent studies, mainly focusing on economic evaluations of germline genetic testing in upper-middle-income countries (Upper MICs) like Malaysia, China, and Brazil. Only one study covered multiple countries with varying incomes, including lower-middle-income nations (Lower MICs) like India. The ICERs values in various screening scenarios for early-stage BC, HER2 negative BC patients, and healthy women with clinical or family history criteria were ranging from USD 2214/QALY to USD 36,342/QALY. Multigene testing for all breast cancer patients with cascade testing was at USD 7729/QALY compared to BRCA alone. Most studies adhered to the CHEERS 2022 criteria, signifying high methodological quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Germline testing could be considered as cost-effective compared to no testing in Upper MICs (e.g., Malaysia, China, Brazil) but not in Lower MICs (e.g., India) based on the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold set by each respective study. Limitations prevent a definite conclusion about cost-effectiveness across LMICs. More high-quality studies are crucial for informed decision-making and improved healthcare practices in these regions.

Delineating intra-tumoral heterogeneity and tumor evolution in breast cancer using precision-based approaches

The burden of breast cancer continues to increase worldwide as it remains the most diagnosed tumor in females and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths. Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease characterized by different subtypes which are driven by aberrations in key genes such as BRCA1 and BRCA2, and hormone receptors. However, even within each subtype, heterogeneity that is driven by underlying evolutionary mechanisms is suggested to underlie poor response to therapy, variance in disease progression, recurrence, and relapse. Intratumoral heterogeneity highlights that the evolvability of tumor cells depends on interactions with cells of the tumor microenvironment. The complexity of the tumor microenvironment is being unraveled by recent advances in screening technologies such as high throughput sequencing; however, there remain challenges that impede the practical use of these approaches, considering the underlying biology of the tumor microenvironment and the impact of selective pressures on the evolvability of tumor cells. In this review, we will highlight the advances made thus far in defining the molecular heterogeneity in breast cancer and the implications thereof in diagnosis, the design and application of targeted therapies for improved clinical outcomes. We describe the different precision-based approaches to diagnosis and treatment and their prospects. We further propose that effective cancer diagnosis and treatment are dependent on unpacking the tumor microenvironment and its role in driving intratumoral heterogeneity. Underwriting such heterogeneity are Darwinian concepts of natural selection that we suggest need to be taken into account to ensure evolutionarily informed therapeutic decisions.

Implementation of BRCA mutations testing in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples of different cancer types

BRCA1 and BRCA2 are onco-suppressor genes involved in the DNA repair mechanism. The presence of BRCA1/2 mutations confers a higher risk of developing several cancer types. To date, the FDA approved various PARP inhibitors to treat selected BRCA1/2 mutated oncologic patients. At first, PARP inhibitors were approved for patients with ovarian and breast cancers, and subsequently for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after the treatment with chemotherapy. The current guidelines for BRCA testing are very heterogeneous between the different types of tumors regarding the diagnostic algorithm and the type of sample to analyze, such as the blood for the germline mutations and the tumoral tissue for the somatic mutations. Few data have currently been described regarding the detection of BRCA1/2 somatic mutations in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples. In this review, we propose an overview of the BRCA mutations in FFPE samples of several cancers, including breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, primary peritoneal, prostate, and pancreatic cancer. We summarize the types and the frequency of BRCA mutations, the guidelines approved for the test, the molecular assays used for the detection and the PARP inhibitors approved for each tumor type.

Preventive population genomics: The model of BRCA related cancers

Preventive population genomics offers the prospect of population stratification for targeting screening and prevention and tailoring care to those at greatest risk. Within cancer, this approach is now within reach, given our expanding knowledge of its heritable components, improved ability to predict risk, and increasing availability of effective preventive strategies. Advances in technology and bioinformatics has made population-testing technically feasible. The BRCA model provides 30 years of insight and experience of how to conceive of and construct care and serves as an initial model for preventive population genomics. Population-based BRCA-testing in the Jewish population is feasible, acceptable, reduces anxiety, does not detrimentally affect psychological well-being or quality of life, is cost-effective and is now beginning to be implemented. Population-based BRCA-testing and multigene panel testing in the wider general population is cost-effective for numerous health systems and can save thousands more lives than the current clinical strategy. There is huge potential for using both genetic and non-genetic information in complex risk prediction algorithms to stratify populations for risk adapted screening and prevention. While numerous strides have been made in the last decade several issues need resolving for population genomics to fulfil its promise and potential for maximizing precision prevention. Healthcare systems need to overcome significant challenges associated with developing delivery pathways, infrastructure expansion including laboratory services, clinical workforce training, scaling of management pathways for screening and prevention. Large-scale real world population studies are needed to evaluate context specific population-testing implementation models for cancer risk prediction, screening and prevention.

Discrepancies in Genetic Testing Procedures of BRCA1/2 Mutations: A National Survey Across China

International guidelines recommend BRCA testing for patients with breast and ovarian cancer. Little is known about the genetic testing practices of BRCA1/2 mutations in laboratories across China. This study was designed to assess the discrepancies in genetic testing procedures of BRCA1/2 mutations across China. An online survey was developed for depicting the BRCA1/2 testing landscape in China. Our results show that there were several variations among the laboratories in technologies adopted, large genomic rearrangement detection, probe design, quality control, variant of uncertain significance interpretation, and disposition of variants in public databases. The discrepancies observed in our study would affect the authenticity of results, thus necessitating the formulation of proper national and international guidelines for optimal BRCA1/2 testing clinical practice for efficient management and patient care of this population.

Multigene panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in the province of Ontario

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic yield of multigene panel testing among patients referred with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC).

METHODS

Patients who met provincial eligibility criteria were tested at the Advanced Molecular Diagnostic Laboratory at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto. Gene sequencing and exon-level copy number variant (CNV) analysis was performed. The referring physician had the opportunity to choose between several different gene panels based on patient phenotype. Cases were included in the analysis based on personal and family history of cancer and the type of panel ordered.

RESULTS

3251 cases that received panel testing were included in this analysis. Overall, 9.1% (295) had a positive (pathogenic or likely pathogenic) result and 27.1% (882) had an inconclusive result (variant of uncertain significance). The genes with the highest prevalence of positive results were in BRCA2 (2.2%, 71/3235), BRCA1 (1.9%, 62/3235), and CHEK2 (1.4%, 40/2916). Of the positive cases, 9.8% (29) had a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant in a gene associated with Lynch syndrome (MSH6, MSH2, MLH1, or PMS2).

CONCLUSIONS

Our overall positive yield is similar to that reported in the literature. The yield of inconclusive results was three times that of positive results. By testing more individuals in families with HBOC and through data-sharing efforts, the clinical significance of most variants may eventually be determined and panel testing for monogenic cancer predisposition syndromes will have greater utility.

Exon splicing analysis of intronic variants in multigene cancer panel testing for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer

The use of multigene panel testing for patients with a predisposition to breast/ovarian cancer is increasing as the identification of variants is useful for diagnosis and disease management. We identified pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants of high-and moderate-risk genes using a 23-gene germline cancer panel in 518 patients with hereditary breast and ovarian cancers (HBOC). The frequency of P/LP variants was 12.4% (64/518) for high- and moderate-penetrant genes, namely, BRCA2 (5.6%), BRCA1 (3.3%), CHEK2 (1.2%), MUTYH (0.8%), PALB2 (0.8%), MLH1 (0.4%), ATM (0.4%), BRIP1 (0.4%), TP53 (0.2%), and PMS2 (0.2%). Five patients possessed two P/LP variants in BRCA1/2 and other genes. We also compared the results from in silico splicing predictive tools and exon splicing patterns from patient samples by analyzing RT-PCR product sequences in six P/LP intronic variants and two intronic variants of unknown significance (VUS). Altered transcriptional fragments were detected for P/LP intronic variants in BRCA1, BRIP1, CHEK2, PARB2, and PMS2. Notably, we identified an in-frame deletion of the BRCA1 C-terminal (BRCT) domain by exon skipping in BRCA1 c.5152+6T>C-as known VUS-indicating a risk for HBOC. Thus, exon splicing analysis can improve the identification of veiled intronic variants that would aid decision making and determination of hereditary cancer risk.

Diagnostic yield of a custom-designed multi-gene cancer panel in Irish patients with breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is genetically heterogeneous, and parellel multi-gene sequencing is the most cost- and time-efficient manner to investigate breast cancer predisposition. Numerous multi-gene panels (MGPs) are commercially available, but many include genes with weak/unproven associaton with breast cancer, or with predisposition to cancer of other types. This study investigates the utility of a custom-designed multi-gene panel in an Irish cohort with breast cancer.

METHODS

A custom panel comprising 83 genes offered by 19 clinical "breast cancer predisposition" MGPs was designed and applied to germline DNA from 91 patients with breast cancer and 77 unaffected ethnicially matched controls. Variants were identified and classified using a custom pipeline.

RESULTS

Nineteen loss-of-function (LOF) and 334 missense variants were identified. After removing common and/or benign variants, 15 LOF and 30 missense variants were analysed. Variants in known breast cancer susceptibility genes were identified, including in BRCA1 and ATM in cases, and in NF1 and CHEK2 in controls. Most variants identified were in genes associated with predisposition to cancers other than breast cancer (BRIP1, RAD50, MUTYH, and mismatch repair genes), or in genes with unknown or unproven association with cancer.

CONCLUSION

Using multi-gene panels enables rapid, cost-effective identification of individuals with high-risk cancer predisposition syndromes. However, this approach also leads to an increased amount of uncertain results. Clinical management of individuals with particular genetic variants in the absence of a matching phenotype/family history is challenging. Further population and functional evidence is required to fully elucidate the clinical relevance of variants in genes of uncertain significance.

A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Multigene Testing for All Patients With Breast Cancer

Importance

Moving to multigene testing for all women with breast cancer (BC) could identify many more mutation carriers who can benefit from precision prevention. However, the cost-effectiveness of this approach remains unaddressed.

Objective

To estimate incremental lifetime effects, costs, and cost-effectiveness of multigene testing of all patients with BC compared with the current practice of genetic testing (BRCA) based on family history (FH) or clinical criteria.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cost-effectiveness microsimulation modeling study compared lifetime costs and effects of high-risk BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 (multigene) testing of all unselected patients with BC (strategy A) with BRCA1/BRCA2 testing based on FH or clinical criteria (strategy B) in United Kingdom (UK) and US populations. Data were obtained from 11 836 patients in population-based BC cohorts (regardless of FH) recruited to 4 large research studies. Data were collected and analyzed from January 1, 2018, through June 8, 2019. The time horizon is lifetime. Payer and societal perspectives are presented. Probabilistic and 1-way sensitivity analyses evaluate model uncertainty.

Interventions

In strategy A, all women with BC underwent BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 testing. In strategy B, only women with BC fulfilling FH or clinical criteria underwent BRCA testing. Affected BRCA/PALB2 carriers could undertake contralateral preventive mastectomy; BRCA carriers could choose risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). Relatives of mutation carriers underwent cascade testing. Unaffected relative carriers could undergo magnetic resonance imaging or mammography screening, chemoprevention, or risk-reducing mastectomy for BC risk and RRSO for ovarian cancer (OC) risk.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained and compared with standard £30 000/QALY and $100 000/QALY UK and US thresholds, respectively. Incidence of OC, BC, excess deaths due to heart disease, and the overall population effects were estimated.

Results

BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 multigene testing for all patients detected with BC annually would cost £10 464/QALY (payer perspective) or £7216/QALY (societal perspective) in the United Kingdom or $65 661/QALY (payer perspective) or $61 618/QALY (societal perspective) in the United States compared with current BRCA testing based on clinical criteria or FH. This is well below UK and US cost-effectiveness thresholds. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, unselected multigene testing remained cost-effective for 98% to 99% of UK and 64% to 68% of US health system simulations. One year's unselected multigene testing could prevent 2101 cases of BC and OC and 633 deaths in the United Kingdom and 9733 cases of BC and OC and 2406 deaths in the United States. Correspondingly, 8 excess deaths due to heart disease occurred in the United Kingdom and 35 in the United States annually.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found unselected, high-risk multigene testing for all patients with BC to be extremely cost-effective compared with testing based on FH or clinical criteria for UK and US health systems. These findings support changing current policy to expand genetic testing to all women with BC.

Retesting of women who are negative for a BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation using a 20-gene panel

BACKGROUND

The value of retesting women who previously tested negative for a pathogenic variant (mutation) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 using an expanded panel of breast and ovarian cancer genes is unclear.

METHODS

We studied 110 BRCA1/2-negative women who were retested using a panel of 20 breast and/or ovarian cancer susceptibility genes at the Advanced Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory (AMDL) at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto between March 2017 and March 2019. All patients had previously tested negative for BRCA pathogenic variants at the AMDL between January 2012 and March 2018 and were subsequently referred for retesting by their physician.

RESULTS

Overall, six pathogenic variants in genes other than BRCA1 and BRCA2 were found (prevalence 5.5%). There were two pathogenic variants found in RAD51C, and one found in each of BRIP1, PALB2, PMS2 and PTEN. The prevalence of pathogenic variants was 6.5% for women affected with cancer (6 of 93), including 4.9% for women with breast cancer (4 of 82) and 22.2% for women with ovarian cancer (2 of 9). None of the 17 unaffected women had a clinically significant or pathogenic variant. There were 44 women (40%) for whom the result of the panel test was inconclusive due to the detection of a variant of uncertain significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that the retesting of BRCA1/2-negative individuals with an expanded panel of 20 breast and ovarian cancer genes can produce clinically relevant results, with a yield of 5.5% for pathogenic variants in genes other than BRCA1 and BRCA2.

An update on genetic risk assessment and prevention: the role of genetic testing panels in breast cancer

Introduction: In the past 5 years, multi-gene panels have replaced the practice of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing in cases of suspected inherited breast cancer susceptibility. A variety of genes have been included on these panels without certainty of their clinical utility. Pertinent current and historical literature was reviewed to provide an up-to-date snapshot of the changing landscape of the use of gene panel tests in the context of breast cancer. Areas covered: Following a recent review of the evidence, 10 genes have been found to have definitive evidence of increased breast cancer risk with variable penetrance. Here, we review the recent changes to the practice of multi-gene panel use in breast cancer diagnoses, including an update on next generation sequencing, alternative models of genetic testing, considerations when ordering these panel tests, and recommendations for management in identified carriers for a variety of genes. A comparison of screening recommendations and carrier frequencies from recent studies is also explored. Lastly, we consider what the future of hereditary oncologic genetic testing holds. Expert opinion: The transition to multi-gene panels in breast cancer patients has improved the likelihood of capturing a rare variant in a well-established gene associated with hereditary breast cancer (e.g. BRCA1 and BRCA2, TP53). There is also an increase in the likelihood of uncovering an uncertain result. This could be in the form of a variant of uncertain significance, or a pathogenic variant in a gene with questionable breast cancer risk-association. Concurrently, a changing landscape of who orders genetic tests will improve access to genetic testing. This pervasiveness of genetic testing must be accompanied with increased genetic literacy in all health-care providers, and access to support from genetics professionals for management of patients and at-risk family members.

Multi gene panel testing for hereditary breast cancer - is it ready to be used?

Breast cancer is one of the most common malignancies and the leading cause of death among women worldwide. About 20% of breast cancers are hereditary. Approximately 30% of the mutations have remained negative after testing BRCA1/2 even in families with a Mendelian inheritance pattern for breast cancer. Additional non-BRCA genes have been identified as predisposing for breast cancer. Multi gene panel testing tries to cover and explain the BRCA negative inherited breast cancer, improving efficiency, speed and costs of the breast cancer screening. We identified 23 studies reporting results from individuals who have undergone multi gene panel testing for hereditary breast cancer and noticed a prevalence of 1-12% of non-BRCA genes, but also a high level of variants of uncertain significance. A result with a high level of variants of uncertain significance is likely to be more costly than bring benefits, as well as increase the anxiety for patients. Regarding further development of multi gene panel testing, more research is required to establish both the optimal care of patients with cancer (specific treatments like PARP inhibitors) and the management of unaffected individuals (chemoprevention and/or prophylactic surgeries). Early detection in these patients as well as prophylactic measures will significantly increase the chance of survival. Therefore, multi gene panel testing is not yet ready to be used outside clear guidelines. In conclusion, studies on additional cohorts will be needed to better define the real prevalence, penetrance and the variants of these genes, as well as to describe clear evidence-based guidelines for these patients.

Boosting care and knowledge about hereditary cancer: European Reference Network on Genetic Tumour Risk Syndromes

Approximately 27-36 million patients in Europe have one of the ~ 5.000-8.000 known rare diseases. These patients often do not receive the care they need or they have a substantial delay from diagnosis to treatment. In March 2017, twenty-four European Reference Networks (ERNs) were launched with the aim to improve the care for these patients through cross border healthcare, in a way that the medical knowledge and expertise travels across the borders, rather than the patients. It is expected that through the ERNs, European patients with a rare disease get access to expert care more often and more quickly, and that research and guideline development will be accelerated resulting in improved diagnostics and therapies. The ERN on Genetic Tumour Risk Syndromes (ERN GENTURIS) aims to improve the identification, genetic diagnostics, prevention of cancer, and treatment of European patients with a genetic predisposition for cancer. The ERN GENTURIS focuses on syndromes such as hereditary breast cancer, hereditary colorectal cancer and polyposis, neurofibromatosis and more rare syndromes e.g. PTEN Hamartoma Tumour Syndrome, Li Fraumeni Syndrome and hereditary diffuse gastric cancer.

Knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers towards genetic testing across three rural Illinois communities

Genetic testing is becoming more prevalent in detecting risk and guiding cancer treatment in our increasingly personalized medicine model. However, few studies have examined underserved populations' perceptions of genetic testing, especially those of rural dwelling populations. We asked residents of three rural communities to complete a self-administered survey gauging their knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers for genetic testing. 64.8% of participants of the overall study completed the survey. Most participants were aware of genetic testing for cancer screening (69.0%) and would likely share results with their family (88.5% if it indicated low risk, 85.9% for high risk). Some barriers were noted, including genetic testing not offered in a clinic nearby (46.9%), insurance company knowing the results (54.0%), cost (49.1%), and no accessible genetic counselors with whom to discuss results (45.6%). Our rural participants were generally knowledgeable about genetic testing, but this may not be reflective of all rural populations. Opportunities exist to mitigate use barriers, expand the utilization of telehealth services and regulatory agency-approved assays, and increase knowledge regarding privacy and protections offered by statute, such as the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (US) and General Data Protection Regulation (Europe).

Next generation sequencing-based gene panel tests for the management of solid tumors

Next generation sequencing (NGS) has been an invaluable tool to put genomic sequencing into clinical practice. The incorporation of clinically relevant target sequences into NGS-based gene panel tests has generated practical diagnostic tools that enable individualized cancer-patient care. The clinical utility of gene panel testing includes investigation of the genetic basis for an individual's response to therapy, such as signaling pathways associated with a response to specific therapies, microsatellite instability and a hypermutated phenotype, and deficiency in the DNA double-strand break repair pathway. In this review, we describe the concept of precision cancer medicine using target sequences in gene panel tests as well as the importance of the control of sample quality in routine NGS-based genomic testing. We describe geographic and ethnic differences in cancer genomes, and discuss issues that need to be addressed in the future based on our experiences in Japan.

Next-generation sequencing-based clinical sequencing: toward precision medicine in solid tumors

Numerous technical and functional advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) have led to the adoption of this technique in conventional clinical practice. Recently, large-scale genomic research and NGS technological innovation have revealed many more details of somatic and germline mutations in solid tumors. This development is allowing for the classification of tumor type sub-categories based on genetic alterations in solid tumors, and based on this information, new drugs and targeted therapies are being administered to patients. This has largely been facilitated by gene panel testing, which allows for a better understanding of the genetic basis for an individual's response to therapy. NGS-based comprehensive gene panel testing is a clinically useful approach to investigate genomic mechanisms, including therapy-related signaling pathways, microsatellite instability, hypermutated phenotypes, and tumor mutation burden. In this review, we describe the concept of precision medicine in solid tumors using NGS-based comprehensive gene panel testing, as well as the importance of quality control of tissue sample handling in routine NGS-based genomic testing, and we discuss issues for the future adoption of this technique in Japan.

Current review of TP53 pathogenic germline variants in breast cancer patients outside Li-Fraumeni syndrome

Pathogenic germline variants in TP53 predispose carriers to the multi-cancer Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS). Widespread multigene panel testing is identifying TP53 pathogenic variants in breast cancer patients outside the strict clinical criteria recommended for LFS testing. We aimed to assess frequency and clinical implications of TP53 pathogenic variants in breast cancer cohorts ascertained outside LFS. Classification of TP53 germline variants reported in 59 breast cancer studies, and publicly available population control sets was reviewed and identified evidence for misclassification of variants. TP53 pathogenic variant frequency was determined for: breast cancer studies grouped by ascertainment characteristics; breast cancer cohorts undergoing panel testing; and population controls. Early age of breast cancer onset, regardless of family history or BRCA1/BRCA2 previous testing, had the highest pick-up rate for TP53 carriers. Patients at risk of hereditary breast cancer unselected for features of LFS carried TP53 pathogenic variants at a frequency comparable to that of other non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer predisposing genes, and ∼threefold more than reported in population controls. These results have implications for the implementation of TP53 testing in broader clinical settings, and suggest urgent need to investigate cancer risks associated with TP53 pathogenic variants in individuals outside the LFS spectrum.

Cost-effectiveness of Population-Based BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1, PALB2 Mutation Testing in Unselected General Population Women

Background

The cost-effectiveness of population-based panel testing for high- and moderate-penetrance ovarian cancer (OC)/breast cancer (BC) gene mutations is unknown. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of population-based BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 mutation testing compared with clinical criteria/family history (FH) testing in unselected general population women.

Methods

A decision-analytic model comparing lifetime costs and effects of criteria/FH-based BRCA1/BRCA2 testing is compared with BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 testing in those fulfilling clinical criteria/strong FH of cancer (≥10% BRCA1/BRCA2 probability) and all women age 30 years or older. Analyses are presented for UK and US populations. Identified carriers undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 carriers can opt for magnetic resonance imaging/mammography, chemoprevention, or risk-reducing mastectomy. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) enabled model uncertainty evaluation. Outcomes include OC, BC, and additional heart disease deaths. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), OC incidence, BC incidence, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. The time horizon is lifetime and perspective is payer.

Results

Compared with clinical criteria/FH-based BRCA1/BRCA2 testing, clinical criteria/FH-based BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 testing is cost-effective (ICER = £7629.65/QALY or $49 282.19/QALY; 0.04 days' life-expectancy gained). Population-based testing for BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 mutations is the most cost-effective strategy compared with current policy: ICER = £21 599.96/QALY or $54 769.78/QALY (9.34 or 7.57 days' life-expectancy gained). At £30 000/QALY and $100 000/QALY willingness-to-pay thresholds, population-based BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 panel testing is the preferred strategy in 83.7% and 92.7% of PSA simulations; criteria/FH-based panel testing is preferred in 16.2% and 5.8% of simulations, respectively. Population-based BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 testing can prevent 1.86%/1.91% of BC and 3.2%/4.88% of OC in UK/US women: 657/655 OC cases and 2420/2386 BC cases prevented per million.

Conclusions

Population-based BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 testing is more cost-effective than any clinical criteria/FH-based strategy. Clinical criteria/FH-based BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 testing is more cost-effective than BRCA1/BRCA2 testing alone.

A Comparison of Whole Genome Sequencing to Multigene Panel Testing in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Patients

BACKGROUND

As DNA sequencing costs decline, genetic testing options have expanded. Whole exome sequencing and whole genome sequencing (WGS) are entering clinical use, posing questions about their incremental value compared with disease-specific multigene panels that have been the cornerstone of genetic testing.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Forty-one patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who had undergone targeted hypertrophic cardiomyopathy genetic testing (either multigene panel or familial variant test) were recruited into the MedSeq Project, a clinical trial of WGS. Results from panel genetic testing and WGS were compared. In 20 of 41 participants, panel genetic testing identified variants classified as pathogenic, likely pathogenic, or uncertain significance. WGS identified 19 of these 20 variants, but the variant detection algorithm missed a pathogenic 18 bp duplication in myosin binding protein C (MYBPC3) because of low coverage. In 3 individuals, WGS identified variants in genes implicated in cardiomyopathy but not included in prior panel testing: a pathogenic protein tyrosine phosphatase, non-receptor type 11 (PTPN11) variant and variants of uncertain significance in integrin-linked kinase (ILK) and filamin-C (FLNC). WGS also identified 84 secondary findings (mean=2 per person, range=0-6), which mostly defined carrier status for recessive conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

WGS detected nearly all variants identified on panel testing, provided 1 new diagnostic finding, and allowed interrogation of posited disease genes. Several variants of uncertain clinical use and numerous secondary genetic findings were also identified. Whereas panel testing and WGS provided similar diagnostic yield, WGS offers the advantage of reanalysis over time to incorporate advances in knowledge, but requires expertise in genomic interpretation to appropriately incorporate WGS into clinical care.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01736566.

Regulatory variants in cancer-related pathway genes predict survival of patients with surgically resected non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

We conducted this study to identify genetic variants in cancer-related pathway genes which can predict prognosis of NSCLC patients after surgery, using a comprehensive list of regulatory single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) prioritized by RegulomeDB.

METHOD

A total of 509 potentially functional SNPs in cancer-related pathway genes selected from RegulomeDB were evaluated. These SNPs were analyzed in a discovery set (n=354), and a replication study was performed in an independent set (n=772). The association of the SNPs with overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were analyzed.

RESULTS

In the discovery set, 76 SNPs were significantly associated with OS or DFS. Among the 76 SNPs, the association was consistently observed for 5 SNPs (ERCC1 rs2298881C>A, BRCA2 rs3092989G>A, NELFE rs440454C>T, PPP2R4 rs2541164G>A, and LTBP4 rs3786527G>A) in the validation set. In combined analysis, ERCC1 rs2298881C>A, BRCA2 rs3092989, NELFE rs440454C>T, and PPP2R4 rs2541164G>A were significantly associated with OS and DFS (adjusted HR ·aHR· for OS=1.46, 0.62, 078, and 0.76, respectively; P=0.003, 0.002, 0.007, and 0.003 respectively; and aHR for DFS=1.27, 0.69, 0.86, and 0.82, respectively; P=0.02, 0.002, 0.03, and 0.008, respectively). The LTBP4 rs3786527G>A was significantly associated with better OS (aHR=0.75; P=0.003).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that five SNPs in the cancer-related pathway genes may be useful for the prediction of the prognosis in patients with surgically resected NSCLC.

Non-BRCA1/2 Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes: A New Frontier with Clinical Consequences for Plastic Surgeons

Twenty percent of breast cancer cases may be related to a genetic mutation conferring an increased risk of malignancy. The most common and prominent breast cancer susceptibility genes are BRCA1 and BRCA2, found in nearly 40% of such cases. However, continued interest and investigation of cancer genetics has led to the identification of a myriad of different breast cancer susceptibility genes. Additional genes, each with unique significance and associated characteristics, continue to be recognized. Concurrently, advanced genetic testing, while still controversial, has become more accessible and cost-effective. As oncologic and reconstructive advances continue to be made in prophylactic breast reconstructive surgery, patients may present to plastic surgeons with an increasingly more diverse array of genetic diagnoses to discuss breast reconstruction. It is therefore imperative that plastic surgeons be familiar with these breast cancer susceptibility genes and their clinical implications. We, therefore, aim to review the most common non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer susceptibility genetic mutations in an effort to assist plastic surgeons in counseling and managing this unique patient population. Included in this review are syndromic breast cancer susceptibility genes such as TP53, PTEN, CDH1, and STK11, among others. Nonsyndromic breast cancer susceptibility genes herein reviewed include PALB2, CHEK2, and ataxia telangiectasia mutated gene. With this knowledge, plastic surgeons can play a central role in the diagnosis and comprehensive treatment, including successful breast reconstruction, of all patients carrying genetic mutations conferring increased risk for breast malignancies.

Coming of age in Canada: a study of population-based genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer

The BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are the two most commonly mutated in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, and they are the canonical pair when it comes to cancer testing. [...]

A Comparison of Whole Genome Sequencing to Multigene Panel Testing in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Patients

BACKGROUND

As DNA sequencing costs decline, genetic testing options have expanded. Whole exome sequencing and whole genome sequencing (WGS) are entering clinical use, posing questions about their incremental value compared with disease-specific multigene panels that have been the cornerstone of genetic testing.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Forty-one patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who had undergone targeted hypertrophic cardiomyopathy genetic testing (either multigene panel or familial variant test) were recruited into the MedSeq Project, a clinical trial of WGS. Results from panel genetic testing and WGS were compared. In 20 of 41 participants, panel genetic testing identified variants classified as pathogenic, likely pathogenic, or uncertain significance. WGS identified 19 of these 20 variants, but the variant detection algorithm missed a pathogenic 18 bp duplication in myosin binding protein C (MYBPC3) because of low coverage. In 3 individuals, WGS identified variants in genes implicated in cardiomyopathy but not included in prior panel testing: a pathogenic protein tyrosine phosphatase, non-receptor type 11 (PTPN11) variant and variants of uncertain significance in integrin-linked kinase (ILK) and filamin-C (FLNC). WGS also identified 84 secondary findings (mean=2 per person, range=0-6), which mostly defined carrier status for recessive conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

WGS detected nearly all variants identified on panel testing, provided 1 new diagnostic finding, and allowed interrogation of posited disease genes. Several variants of uncertain clinical use and numerous secondary genetic findings were also identified. Whereas panel testing and WGS provided similar diagnostic yield, WGS offers the advantage of reanalysis over time to incorporate advances in knowledge, but requires expertise in genomic interpretation to appropriately incorporate WGS into clinical care.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01736566.

Mutation screening of 10 cancer susceptibility genes in unselected breast cancer patients

Variants of cancer susceptibility genes other than BRCA1/2 have been proved to be associated with increased risks of breast cancer. This study was performed to investigate the spectrum and prevalence of mutations in 10 cancer susceptibility genes in paired tumor/normal tissues of 292 unselected Chinese breast cancer patients. We performed an analysis of germline and somatic variants in ATM, CDH1, CHEK2, ESR1, GATA3, MAP3K1, MSH2, PALB2, RB1 and STK11 genes by integrating microfluidic PCR-based target enrichment and next-generation sequencing technologies. In total, 3 germline and 25 somatic deleterious mutations were found among 27 patients (9.25%), and 17 of them were novel mutations. Most deleterious mutations were prevalent in luminal A invasive breast cancer (P = .014). We also observed 83 variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in 100 patients (34.25%), 23 of which were predicted to be deleterious by in silico prediction programs (MetaSVM and MetaLR). VUS carriers had higher positive rate of lymph node metastasis than non-carriers (P = .008) and were predominantly present in ER+ tumors (P = .018). Our findings would enhance the understanding of the molecular mechanisms of breast cancer in Chinese population.

The role of screening MRI in the era of next generation sequencing and moderate-risk genetic mutations

With the advent of next-generation sequencing, the ability to rapidly analyze numerous genes simultaneously has led to the creation of large cancer gene panels. Some of these genes, like BRCA1 and BRCA2, have been heavily researched and have well-established management guidelines. Other more newly established genes, like ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2, have previously had less robust research surrounding them which has limited the ability to create accurate risk estimates. With their inclusion on gene panels, there has been more pressure to produce management guidelines for patients discovered to carry pathogenic variants in these genes. For known high-risk genes, it is recommended for breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammogram to be offered annually. This combination has been proven to be more effective at detecting breast cancer than mammography alone, with a combined sensitivity of 94% (Leach et al. in Lancet 365(9473):1769-1778, 2005). Women with a lifetime risk of breast cancer of 20% and higher have been recommended to have both breast MRI and mammography performed (Saslow et al. in CA Cancer J Clin 57(2):75-89, 2007). For women with pathogenic variants detected in moderate risk genes with lifetime breast cancer risks of at least 20%, breast MRI should be offered as part of their management. For more newly discovered genes with suspected associated risks at or above 20%, the use of breast MRI should be considered for their management as well.

Current guidelines for BRCA testing of breast cancer patients are insufficient to detect all mutation carriers

Background

Identification of BRCA mutations in breast cancer (BC) patients influences treatment and survival and may be of importance for their relatives. Testing is often restricted to women fulfilling high-risk criteria. However, there is limited knowledge of the sensitivity of such a strategy, and of the clinical aspects of BC caused by BRCA mutations in less selected BC cohorts. The aim of this report was to address these issues by evaluating the results of BRCA testing of BC patients in South-Eastern Norway.

Methods

1371 newly diagnosed BC patients were tested with sequencing and Multi Ligation Probe Amplification (MLPA). Prevalence of mutations was calculated, and BC characteristics among carriers and non-carriers compared. Sensitivity and specificity of common guidelines for BRCA testing to identify carriers was analyzed. Number of identified female mutation positive relatives was evaluated.

Results

A pathogenic BRCA mutation was identified in 3.1%. Carriers differed from non-carriers in terms of age at diagnosis, family history, grade, ER/PR-status, triple negativity (TNBC) and Ki67, but not in HER2 and TNM status. One mutation positive female relative was identified per mutation positive BC patient. Using age of onset below 40 or TNBC as criteria for testing identified 32-34% of carriers. Common guidelines for testing identified 45-90%, and testing all below 60 years identified 90%. Thirty-seven percent of carriers had a family history of cancer that would have qualified for predictive BRCA testing. A Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) was identified in 4.9%.

Conclusions

Mutation positive BC patients differed as a group from mutation negative. However, the commonly used guidelines for testing were insufficient to detect all mutation carriers in the BC cohort. Thirty-seven percent had a family history of cancer that would have qualified for predictive testing before they were diagnosed with BC. Based on our combined observations, we suggest it is time to discuss whether all BC patients should be offered BRCA testing, both to optimize treatment and improve survival for these women, but also to enable identification of healthy mutation carriers within their families. Health services need to be aware of referral possibility for healthy women with cancer in their family.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3422-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Next Generation Sequencing and Multi-Gene Panel Testing: Implications for the Oncology Nurse

OBJECTIVES

To review past, current, and future events in genetics and discuss how genetic testing information personalizes cancer screening, detection, and treatment. A case study is presented to illustrate key points.

DATA SOURCES

National guidelines, evidence-based summaries, peer-reviewed studies, editorials, and web sites.

CONCLUSION

Multi-gene testing using next-generation sequencing has changed the landscape for hereditary cancer syndromes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Nurses have key roles in personalizing health care including recognizing the complexities of genetic testing, assessing family history, understanding gene/environment factors, referring for genetics consultations, and promoting registry studies. In order to be effective, nurses must stay current with the rapidly-changing technology and guidelines for genetic evaluations and testing.

A Multigene Test Could Cost-Effectively Help Extend Life Expectancy for Women at Risk of Hereditary Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends that women who carry gene variants that confer substantial risk for breast cancer consider risk-reduction strategies, that is, enhanced surveillance (breast magnetic resonance imaging and mammography) or prophylactic surgery. Pathogenic variants can be detected in women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer syndromes by multigene panel testing.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether using a seven-gene test to identify women who should consider risk-reduction strategies could cost-effectively increase life expectancy.

METHODS

We estimated effectiveness and lifetime costs from a payer perspective for two strategies in two hypothetical cohorts of women (40-year-old and 50-year-old cohorts) who meet the National Comprehensive Cancer Network-defined family history criteria for multigene testing. The two strategies were the usual test strategy for variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 and the seven-gene test strategy for variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, TP53, PTEN, CDH1, STK11, and PALB2. Women found to have a pathogenic variant were assumed to undergo either prophylactic surgery or enhanced surveillance.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the seven-gene test strategy compared with the BRCA1/2 test strategy was $42,067 per life-year gained or $69,920 per quality-adjusted life-year gained for the 50-year-old cohort and $23,734 per life-year gained or $48,328 per quality-adjusted life-year gained for the 40-year-old cohort. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the seven-gene test strategy cost less than $100,000 per life-year gained in 95.7% of the trials for the 50-year-old cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Testing seven breast cancer-associated genes, followed by risk-reduction management, could cost-effectively improve life expectancy for women at risk of hereditary breast cancer.

PALB2 mutations in BRCA1/2-mutation negative breast and ovarian cancer patients from Poland

Background

The PALB2 gene encodes a protein that plays a crucial role in maintaining genomic integrity. Germline inactivating mutations in PALB2 are associated with an increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer. The prevalence and spectrum of recurrent PALB2 germline mutations in breast and ovarian cancer patients from Poland is not clearly defined.

Methods

PALB2 exons were amplified from 460 BRCA1/2-mutation negative women with familial breast and/or ovarian cancer and early-onset breast cancer using AmpliSeq technology and sequenced on an Ion Torrent PGM sequencer. In addition, eight selected variants were genotyped using TaqMan assays in 807 BRCA1/2-mutation negative breast cancer patients and 1690 healthy women.

Results

Two recurrent PALB2 mutations, c.172_175delTTGT and c.509_510delGA, were identified, along with one novel mutation, c.347insT. In total, PALB2 pathogenic mutations were detected in 7/460 (1.5%) patients. Furthermore, in breast and/or ovarian cancer patients, several single nucleotide variants (SNVs) were detected in the PALB2 coding region. In an additional group of 807 patients, eight (1%) carriers of two pathogenic mutations, c.172_175delTTGT (0.5%) and c.509_510delGA (0.5%), were identified. The c.509_510delGA mutation was not identified in healthy controls, while c.172_175delTTGT was identified in 4/1690 (0.24%) of control women.

Conclusions

Germline mutations in the PALB2 gene were observed at a frequency of approximately 1.5% in Polish breast and/or ovarian cancer patients. Our study confirms two recurrent PALB2 mutations; c.172_175delGA and c.509_510delGA.

Next-Generation Sequencing in Oncology: Genetic Diagnosis, Risk Prediction and Cancer Classification

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology has expanded in the last decades with significant improvements in the reliability, sequencing chemistry, pipeline analyses, data interpretation and costs. Such advances make the use of NGS feasible in clinical practice today. This review describes the recent technological developments in NGS applied to the field of oncology. A number of clinical applications are reviewed, i.e., mutation detection in inherited cancer syndromes based on DNA-sequencing, detection of spliceogenic variants based on RNA-sequencing, DNA-sequencing to identify risk modifiers and application for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, cancer somatic mutation analysis, pharmacogenetics and liquid biopsy. Conclusive remarks, clinical limitations, implications and ethical considerations that relate to the different applications are provided.

Rare variants in BRCA2 and CHEK2 are associated with the risk of urinary tract cancers

Previous studies have shown that two rare variants, rs11571833 in BRCA2 and rs17879961 in CHEK2 were associated with lung cancer. However, the associations between these two variants and urinary tract cancers risk remain largely unexplored. We applied imputation of three genome-wide association studies published in the database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP). Unconditional logistic regression analysis and meta-analysis were performed to assess the association between these two variants and the risk of urinary tract cancers. Our results showed that rs11571833[T] had an effect on urinary tract cancers predisposition (ORmeta = 1.45, Pmeta = 0.013), especially associated with increased the risk of bladder cancer (ORmeta = 1.60, Pmeta = 0.010). Moreover, rs17879961[C] had a protective effect on the urinary tract cancers (ORmeta = 0.67, Pmeta = 1.0 × 10(-3)) and was mostly associated with a lower incidence of renal cell carcinoma (ORmeta = 0.51, Pmeta = 2.0 × 10(-3)). Together, our study indicates that BRCA2 and CHEK2 play an important role in the genetic susceptibility to urinary tract cancers.

Environmental Chemical Assessment in Clinical Practice: Unveiling the Elephant in the Room

A growing body of evidence suggests chemicals present in air, water, soil, food, building materials and household products are toxicants that contribute to the many chronic diseases typically seen in routine medical practice. Yet, despite calls from numerous organisations to provide clinicians with more training and awareness in environmental health, there are multiple barriers to the clinical assessment of toxic environmental exposures. Recent developments in the fields of systems biology, innovative breakthroughs in biomedical research encompassing the "-omics" fields, and advances in mobile sensing, peer-to-peer networks and big data, provide tools that future clinicians can use to assess environmental chemical exposures in their patients. There is also a need for concerted action at all levels, including actions by individual patients, clinicians, medical educators, regulators, government and non-government organisations, corporations and the wider civil society, to understand the "exposome" and minimise the extent of toxic exposures on current and future generations. Clinical environmental chemical risk assessment may provide a bridge between multiple disciplines that uses new technologies to herald in a new era in personalised medicine that unites clinicians, patients and civil society in the quest to understand and master the links between the environment and human health.