Psychosocial outcomes following germline multigene panel testing in an ethnically and economically diverse cohort of patients

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the psychological outcomes of germline multigene panel testing, particularly among diverse patients and those with moderate-risk pathogenic variants (PVs).

METHODS

Study participants (N = 1264) were counseled and tested with a 25- or 28-gene panel and completed a 3-month postresult survey including the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA).

RESULTS

The mean age was 52 years, 80% were female, and 70% had cancer; 45% were non-Hispanic White, 37% were Hispanic, 10% were Asian, 3% were Black, and 5% had another race/ethnicity. Approximately 28% had a high school education or less, and 23% were non-English-speaking. The genetic test results were as follows: 7% had a high-risk PV, 6% had a moderate-risk PV, 35% had a variant of uncertain significance (VUS), and 52% were negative. Most participants (92%) had a total MICRA score ≤ 38, which corresponded to a mean response of "never," "rarely," or only "sometimes" reacting negatively to results. A multivariate analysis found that mean total MICRA scores were significantly higher (more uncertainty/distress) among high- and moderate-risk PV carriers (29.7 and 24.8, respectively) than those with a VUS or negative results (17.4 and 16.1, respectively). Having cancer or less education was associated with a significantly higher total MICRA score; race/ethnicity was not associated with the total MICRA score. High- and moderate-risk PV carriers did not differ significantly from one another in the total MICRA score, uncertainty, distress, or positive experiences.

CONCLUSIONS

In a diverse population undergoing genetic counseling and multigene panel testing for hereditary cancer risk, the psychological response corresponded to test results and showed low distress and uncertainty. Further studies are needed to assess patient understanding and subsequent cancer screening among patients from diverse backgrounds.

LAY SUMMARY

Multigene panel tests for hereditary cancer have become widespread despite concerns about adverse psychological reactions among carriers of moderate-risk pathogenic variants (mutations) and among carriers of variants of uncertain significance. This large study of an ethnically and economically diverse cohort of patients undergoing panel testing found that 92% "never," "rarely," or only "sometimes" reacted negatively to results. Somewhat higher uncertainty and distress were identified among carriers of high- and moderate-risk pathogenic variants, and lower levels were identified among those with a variant of uncertain significance or a negative result. Although the psychological response corresponded to risk, reactions to testing were favorable, regardless of results.

Advancing precision medicine in clinical oncology: Whole exome paired tumor-normal DNA and RNA sequencing at a single-institution cancer center

e14006

Background: Next generation sequencing (NGS) allows for reliable, comprehensive and cost-effective identification of clinically actionable genetic and genomic alterations. The increasing adoption of NGS in clinical oncology has increased our ability to identify germline alterations predisposing to cancer development as well as somatic changes enabling prescription of individualized cancer treatment and enhanced clinical trial participation. Here we summarize implementation of an NGS-based precision medicine initiative involving oncology patients from a single institution cancer center. Methods: IRB-approved NGS matched whole exome (WES) germline and solid tumor somatic tumor sequencing together with somatic tumor RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) were performed using germline DNA extracted from peripheral blood lymphocytes and nucleic acids for tumor DNA and RNA sequencing obtained from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor specimens. Results of sequencing and analyses were presented to a multi-disciplinary tumor board to establish recommendations for management of germline pathogenic variation, therapeutic drug matching, clinical trials eligibility and molecularly informed patient prognosis. Results: A total of 1,005 patients completed sequencing. Germline and somatic WES exceeded 100X and 250X mean target coverage, respectively; somatic RNA-seq exceeded 200 million mean reads. Patients ranged in age from 17 to 90 years. The study cohort comprised comparable numbers of female (51%) and male (49%) patients. Ethnicities and races were broadly represented with 22% of participants identifying as Hispanic, 14% as Asian, 4% as Black, 55% as Non-Hispanic White and 5% as other. The most common solid tumor histological classification was colorectal (18%), followed by breast (16%), prostate (7%), head and neck (7%), sarcoma (7%), ovarian (5%), melanoma (4%) and lung (3%). Bioinformatic analyses and precision medicine tumor board review established that 12% of patients harbored a germline pathogenic variant and 43% carried clinically actionable genetic/genomic alterations; a majority of patients met molecular requirements for participation in a clinical trial. Conclusions: This study confirms the feasibility and utility of clinical NGS and precision medicine tumor board review in clinical oncology to identify germline genetic pathology, deliver personalized cancer therapeutics, increase clinical trial enrollment and clarify diagnosis and prognosis.

Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of the Diagnostic Yield and Patient Experience of Multiplex Gene Panel Testing For Hereditary Cancer Risk

Purpose

Multiplex gene panel testing (MGPT) allows for the simultaneous analysis of germline cancer susceptibility genes. This study describes the diagnostic yield and patient experiences of MGPT in diverse populations.

Patients and Methods

This multicenter, prospective cohort study enrolled participants from three cancer genetics clinics—University of Southern California Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles County and University of Southern California Medical Center, and Stanford Cancer Institute—who met testing guidelines or had a 2.5% or greater probability of a pathogenic variant (N = 2,000). All patients underwent 25- or 28-gene MGPT and results were compared with differential genetic diagnoses generated by pretest expert clinical assessment. Post-test surveys on distress, uncertainty, and positive experiences were administered at 3 months (69% response rate) and 1 year (57% response rate).

Results

Of 2,000 participants, 81% were female, 41% were Hispanic, 26% were Spanish speaking only, and 30% completed high school or less education. A total of 242 participants (12%) carried one or more pathogenic variant (positive), 689 (34%) carried one or more variant of uncertain significance (VUS), and 1,069 (53%) carried no pathogenic variants or VUS (negative). More than one third of pathogenic variants (34%) were not included in the differential diagnosis. After testing, few patients (4%) had prophylactic surgery, most (92%) never regretted testing, and most (80%) wanted to know all results, even those of uncertain significance. Positive patients were twice as likely as negative/VUS patients (83% v 41%; P < .001) to encourage their relatives to be tested.

Conclusion

In a racially/ethnically and socioeconomically diverse cohort, MGPT increased diagnostic yield. More than one third of identified pathogenic variants were not clinically anticipated. Patient regret and prophylactic surgery use were low, and patients appropriately encouraged relatives to be tested for clinically relevant results.

Patient communication of cancer genetic test results in a diverse population

Research on the communication of genetic test results has focused predominately on non-Hispanic White (NHW) mutation-positive families with high-risk hereditary cancer conditions. Little is known about this process for racially and ethnically diverse individuals or for those with mutations in moderate risk genes. The communication behaviors of study participants who carry a gene mutation were analyzed 3 months after disclosure of genetic test results. Participants were queried about communication of their results, as part of a prospective study of multi-gene panel genetic testing. The responses of particpants who tested positive were analyzed by race/ethnicity and by level of cancer risk (high vs. moderate). Of the 216 mutation-positive study participants, 136 (63%) responded. Self-reported race/ethnicity was 46% NHW, 41% Hispanic, 10% Asian, and 2% Black. The majority (99.0%, n = 135) had shared their results with someone and 96% had told a family member (n = 130). Hispanic respondents were less likely to have told a healthcare provider about their results than NHW (29% vs. 68%, p < .0001). Asian respondents were less likely than NHW to encourage family members to undergo testing (OR = 0.1, p = .03); but Asian family members were more likely to undergo testing (OR = 8.0, p = .03). There were no differences in communication between those with a mutation in a high- or moderate-risk gene. Three months post genetic testing, communication of results was very high; 30% reported a family member underwent genetic testing. Further studies are needed to better understand the communication process in individuals from diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds.

Unexpected CDH1 Mutations Identified on Multigene Panels Pose Clinical Management Challenges

Purpose

Mutations in the CDH1 gene confer up to an 80% lifetime risk of diffuse gastric cancer and up to a 60% lifetime risk of lobular breast cancer. Testing for CDH1 mutations is recommended for individuals who meet the International Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium (IGCLC) guidelines. However, the interpretation of unexpected CDH1 mutations identified in patients who do not meet IGCLC criteria or do not have phenotypes suggestive of hereditary diffuse gastric cancer is clinically challenging. This study aims to describe phenotypes of CDH1 mutation carriers identified through multigene panel testing (MGPT) and to offer informed recommendations for medical management.

Patients and Methods

This cross-sectional prevalence study included all patients who underwent MGPT between March 2012 and September 2014 from a commercial laboratory (n = 26,936) and an academic medical center cancer genetics clinic (n = 318) to estimate CDH1 mutation prevalence and associated clinical phenotypes. CDH1 mutation carriers were classified as IGCLC positive (met criteria), IGCLC partial phenotype, and IGCLC negative.

Results

In the laboratory cohort, 16 (0.06%) of 26,936 patients were identified as having a pathogenic CDH1 mutation. In the clinic cohort, four (1.26%) of 318 had a pathogenic CDH1 mutation. Overall, 65% of mutation carriers did not meet the revised testing criteria published in 2015. All three CDH1 mutation carriers who had risk-reducing gastrectomy had pathologic evidence of diffuse gastric cancer despite not having met IGCLC criteria.

Conclusion

The majority of CDH1 mutations identified on MGPT are unexpected and found in individuals who do not fit the accepted diagnostic testing criteria. These test results alter the medical management of CDH1-positive patients and families and provide opportunities for early detection and risk reduction.

Safety of multiplex gene testing for inherited cancer risk in a fully accrued prospective trial

1576

Background: Sequencing more genes increases the chance of finding a pathogenic mutation and/or a variant of uncertain significance (VUS). Little is known about potential harms of multiplex testing for cancer risk, such as unwarranted surgery or adverse psychological effects. Methods: We conducted a prospective trial of sequencing 25 genes : APC, ATM, BARD1, BMPR1A, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CDK4, CDKN2A, CHEK2, EPCAM, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, MUTYH, NBN, PALB2, PMS2, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D, SMAD4, STK11, TP53. Patients were eligible if they met standard testing guidelines or predictive models estimated ≥2.5% mutation probability. Participants were surveyed 3 months post-test: the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) scale measured distress, uncertainty and positive experiences. We report on the fully accrued trial (N = 2000). Results: 1998/2000 (99.9%) participants currently have reported results: 12.1% tested positive for a pathogenic mutation (Pos), 34.5% had VUS only and 53.5% tested negative (Neg). Median age was 51, 81% were female, 40% Hispanic, and 72% had a cancer history. Self-reported preventive surgery rates were low (mastectomy 9.3%, hysterectomy 1.5%, oophorectomy 1.6%), with no difference between VUS and Neg patients (p = 0.346). Most patients never or rarely had thoughts of cancer affecting daily activities (Pos 59.5%, VUS 66.9%, Neg 71.0%), never regretted testing (Pos 84.1%, VUS 90.0%, Neg 93.6%), and wanted to know all results, even those that doctors do not fully understand (Pos 81.7%, VUS 78.8%, Neg 77.1%). Pos patients had higher MICRA distress and uncertainty scores than VUS and Neg patients, whose distress and uncertainty scores did not differ significantly (p = 0.165, p = 0.129). Relatives of Pos patients completed genetic testing (30.4%) more often than VUS (5.8%) or Neg patients (5.1%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: After multiplex testing of 2000 diverse patients, few reported preventive surgery at 3 months; VUS patients had no more distress, regret or uncertainty than Neg patients. Pos patients most often advised relatives to test, suggesting that participants understood the implications of test results. Longer-term follow-up of test-related outcomes is underway. Clinical trial information: NCT02324062.

Expanded yield of multiplex panel testing in fully accrued prospective trial

1525

Background: Genetic testing is a powerful tool for stratifying cancer risk. Multiplex gene panel (MGP) testing allows simultaneous analysis of multiple high- and moderate- penetrance genes. However, the diagnostic yield and clinical utility of panels remain to be further delineated. Methods: A report of a fully accrued trial (N = 2000) of patients undergoing cancer-risk assessment. Patients were enrolled in a multicenter prospective cohort study where diagnostic yield and off-target mutation detection was evaluated of a 25 gene MGP comprised of APC, ATM, BARD1, BMPR1A, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CDK4, CDKN2A, CHEK2, EPCAM, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, MUTYH, NBN, PALB2, PMS2, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D, SMAD4, STK11, TP53. Patients were enrolled if they met standard testing guidelines or were predicted to have a ≥2.5% mutation probability by validated models. Differential diagnoses (DDx) were generated after expert clinical genetics assessment, formulating up to 8 inherited cancer syndromes ranked by estimated likelihood. Results: 1998/2000 patients had reported MGP test results. Women constituted 81% of the sample, and 40% were Hispanic; 241 tested positive for at least 1 pathogenic mutation (12.1%) and 689 (34.5%) patients carried at least 1 variant of uncertain significance. The most frequently identified mutations were in BRCA1 (17%, n = 41), BRCA2 (15%, n = 36), APC (8%, n = 19), CHEK2 (7%, n = 17), ATM (7%, n = 16). 39 patients (16%) had at least 1 pathogenic mutation in a mismatch repair (MMR) gene ( MLH1, n = 10; MSH2, n = 10; MSH6, n = 8; PMS2, n = 11). 43 individuals (18%) had MUTYH mutations – 41 were monoallelic. Among 19 patients who had mutations in APC – 16 were APC I1307K. Only 65% (n = 159) of PV results were included in the DDx, with 35% (n = 86) of mutations not clinically suspected. Conclusions: In a diverse cohort, multiplex panel use increased genetic testing yield substantially: 35% carried pathogenic mutations in unsuspected genes, suggesting a significant contribution of expanded multiplex testing to clinical cancer risk assessment. The identification of off-target mutations broadens our understanding of cancer risk and genotype-phenotype correlations. Follow-up is ongoing to assess the clinical utility of multiplex gene panel testing. Clinical trial information: NCT02324062.

Abstract PD7-01: Interim analysis of multiplex gene panel testing for inherited susceptibility to breast cancer

Background: Emerging evidence demonstrates the effectiveness of targeted gene sequencing panels as a practical method for the diagnosis of inherited susceptibility to breast cancer. Sequencing of multiple high and moderate risk genes simultaneously accelerates the discovery of deleterious mutations (DM) or variants of unknown significance (VUS). However, a consequence of Multiplex Gene Panel (MGP) testing is the discovery of unexpected DMs in high or moderate risk genes other than BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2). The overall clinical utility and incremental gain of information conferred by MGP testing in hereditary cancer risk assessment is still unknown.

Methods: We are conducting a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients undergoing cancer-risk assessment using a 25 gene sequencing panel, which includes APC, ATM, BARD1, BMPR1A, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CDK4, CDKN2A, CHEK2, EPCAM, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, MUTYH, NBN, PALB2, PMS2, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D, SMAD4, STK11, and TP53. Patients were recruited from August 2014 to June 2015 at three medical centers. Patients are enrolled if they meet standard criteria for genetic testing or are predicted to have a ≥ 2.5% probability of inherited susceptibility to cancer calculated by validated risk prediction models. We present a planned interim analysis after enrolling 500 of 2000 total participants.

Results: HCP testing was performed for 332 patients referred for clinical suspicion of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). In this cohort, 96.7% were female (n=321) and the mean age was 50 years (standard deviation, SD=12.2); race/ethnicity was 43.1% Hispanic (n=143), 37% Non-Hispanic White (n=123), 4.2% Black (n=14), 10.5% Asian (n=35), and 1.8% other (n=6). Among this cohort, 37 tested positive for one deleterious mutation (DM) (11.1%: 95% confidence interval (CI), 8.2% to 15%) and 118 patients carried at least one variant of uncertain significance (VUS) (35.5%: 95% CI, 30.6% to 69%). Excluding BRCA1 or BRCA2, 14 patients (4.3%: 95% CI, 2.6% to 7.2%) have a DM in ATM (n=3), CHEK2 (n=2), MSH6 (n=1), MUTYH (n=3), PALB2 (n=1), PMS2 (n=1), RAD51C (n=2), and TP53 (n=2). In a patient with an unexpected PMS2 mutation, enhanced cancer surveillance based on Lynch Syndrome guidelines was recommended. Among 160 patients with a history of invasive breast cancer or breast DCIS, 19 patients carried a DM (11.8 %: 95 CI, 7.7% to 17.8%).

Conclusion: In this multicenter prospective cohort study among a diverse group of participants undergoing 25-gene MGP testing, 11.1% of participants tested positive for a DM. Among participants testing negative for BRCA1 and BRCA2, MGP testing identified DMs in 4.3% of participants prompting clinically appropriate risk reduction recommendations and enhanced cancer surveillance. Ongoing recruitment and long-term follow-up are in progress.

Citation Format: Idos GE, Kurian AW, Mcdonnell KJ, Ricker CN, Sturgeon DY, Culver JO, Lowstuter K, Hartman A-R, Allen B, Teeter C-R, Kingham KE, Koff R, Lebensohn A, Chun NM, Mills MA, Petrovchich I, Hong C, Ladabaum U, Ford JM, Gruber SB. Interim analysis of multiplex gene panel testing for inherited susceptibility to breast cancer. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD7-01.

Abstract P2-09-07: The patient experience in a prospective trial of multiplex gene panel testing for cancer risk

Background: Multiplex gene sequencing panels (MGP) are increasingly used for assessment of hereditary breast cancer risk. Compared to testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) only, testing more genes increases the likelihood of identifying a deleterious mutation (DM) and/or a variant of uncertain significance (VUS), which might cause distress, uncertainty or regret about testing. Little is known about the patient experience of MGP testing.

Methods: We conducted a prospective study of MGP testing, using a panel of 25 genes: APC, ATM, BARD1, BMPR1A, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CDK4, CDKN2A, CHEK2, EPCAM, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, MUTYH, NBN, PALB2, PMS2, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D, SMAD4, STK11, and TP53. Participants were enrolled at three medical centers and were eligible if they met standard genetic testing guidelines or if they had a ≥2.5% probability of a DM in any gene on the panel, as calculated by predictive models (e.g. IBIS, Penn II, MMRPro). Participants were surveyed about their experiences with MGP testing including distress and uncertainty at baseline (before test results disclosure) and three months later. The 25-item Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) scale measured distress, uncertainty and positive experiences at three months after testing. We present a planned interim analysis after enrolling 500 of 2000 total participants.

Results: Of 500 participants, 332 (66%) were referred for suspicion of hereditary breast/ovarian cancer syndrome. Of these 332, 97% were female, 79% were white, 43% were Hispanic and 33% were Spanish-speaking only; for 25%, high school was their highest level of education. A total of 48% had breast cancer, 5% had ovarian cancer, and 7% had another cancer: 11% had a DM and 35% had VUS in one or more genes. At study entry most participants thought about cancer rarely or not at all (69%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 58%-77%), and few (7%, CI 3%-14%) had thoughts of cancer that affected their daily lives; results were unchanged three months later, after genetic results disclosure (Chi-squared test, p-value &gt;0.1). MICRA scores at three months were low for distress (mean score 2 out of a possible 30) and uncertainty (mean score 7 out of 45), and high for positive testing experiences (mean score 9 out of 15). Most (82%, CI 72%-88%) participants wanted to know all of their MGP results even if the clinical relevance was not fully understood, and most (87%, CI 79%-93%) never regretted learning their MGP results.

Conclusions: Among diverse participants of a prospective, multi-center MGP testing trial, cancer- and genetic testing-related distress were low at entry and remained low three months later. These results provide no evidence for an increase in distress or uncertainty after MGP. Longer-term follow-up in a larger cohort is underway.

Citation Format: Kurian AW, Idos G, McDonnell K, Ricker C, Sturgeon D, Culver J, Lowstuter K, Hartman A-R, Allen B, Rowe-Teeter C, Kingham KE, Koff RB, Lebensohn A, Chun NM, Petrovchich IM, Mills MA, Hong C, Ladabaum U, Ford JM, Gruber SB. The patient experience in a prospective trial of multiplex gene panel testing for cancer risk. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-09-07.

Beyond Li Fraumeni Syndrome: clinical characteristics of families with p53 germline mutations

PURPOSE

A clinical testing cohort was used to gain a broader understanding of the spectrum of tumors associated with germline p53 mutations to aid clinicians in identifying high-risk families.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Full sequencing of the coding exons (2 to 11) and associated splice junctions of the p53 gene was performed on 525 consecutive patients whose blood samples were submitted for diagnostic testing. Clinical features of p53 germline carriers in this cohort were characterized, clinical referral schemes based on reported p53-associated family phenotypes were evaluated, and practical mutation prevalence tables were generated.

RESULTS

Mutations were identified in 91 (17%) of 525 patients submitted for testing. All families with a p53 mutation had at least one family member with a sarcoma, breast, brain, or adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC). Every individual with a choroid plexus tumor (eight of eight) and 14 of 21 individuals with a childhood ACC had a mutation regardless of family history. Based on reported personal and family history, 95% of patients (71 of 75) with a mutation met either classic Li Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) or Chompret criteria. A simplified prevalence table provides a concise summary of individual and family characteristics associated with p53 mutations.

CONCLUSION

This is, to our knowledge, the largest single report of diagnostic testing for germline p53 mutations, yielding practical mutation prevalence tables and suggesting clinical utility of classic LFS and Chompret criteria for identifying a subset of cancer-prone families with p53 germline mutations, with important implications for diagnosis and management.

Scoping the family history: assessment of Lynch syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer) in primary care settings--a primer for nurse practitioners

PURPOSE

To describe and discuss the characteristic features and red flags of Lynch syndrome, also known as hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer, that warrants referral for genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA). A focus on the nurse practitioner's (NP) role in familial risk assessment, physical examination, initiation of genetic referrals, and issues related to the genetic counseling process are also discussed.

DATA SOURCES

A review and synopsis of professional guidelines, clinical articles, and research studies on Lynch syndrome and the genetics of inherited cancer syndromes associated with colorectal cancer. Online resources from the American Gastroenterological Association, American Medical Association, the American Nurses Association, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, the National Cancer Institute, the National Cancer Institute-Physician Data Query, the National Coalition of Health Professional Education in Genetics, the National Human Genome Research Institute, the National Society of Genetic Counselors, International Society of Nurses in Genetics, and the Oncology Nursing Society.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 5% of all colon cancers are because of a germ line mutation predisposing individuals and their family members to colorectal and other cancers. Although the efficacy of screening modalities is established, healthcare providers often fail to identify those at greatest risk for disease. The extended family history is the first step in recognition of individuals "suspect" for hereditary colon cancers such as Lynch syndrome. Early-age onset of Lynch syndrome-associated cancers, an autosomal-dominant pattern, multiple primary tumors in an individual or multiple family members with Lynch syndrome-associated cancers, characteristic pathological features of colon cancer, or a known germ line Lynch syndrome mutation in a family member are "red flags" that will aid NPs in identifying individuals who may benefit from GCRA. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSE PRACTITIONER PRACTICE: The importance of enhanced surveillance for early diagnosis and prevention of disease is a critical part of primary care. Thus, it is imperative that NPs obtain a minimum of a three-generation pedigree, recognize hereditary cancer patterns, and provide referral counseling for consideration of genetic testing of individuals suspect for Lynch syndrome.

Assessing breast cancer risk and BRCA1/2 carrier probability

By identifying individuals with an increased risk of breast cancer, health professionals can offer prevention strategies tailored to individual risk levels. Such strategies may include early initiation of cancer screening, more frequent screening, targeted therapeutic or behavioral interventions, or prophylactic surgery. In order to achieve clinical benefits with this approach, however, risk assessment strategies and effective prevention measures must be available. In this article we review current knowledge about cancer risk assessment for unaffected women and probability models for identifying individuals who are carriers of a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2, the two genes most commonly implicated in hereditary breast cancer. We review BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in various ethnic populations and how this information factors into risk assessment. Additionally, we summarize the current guidelines for when to make a referral to genetic services for risk assessment and evaluation.

Colorectal cancer surveillance behaviors among members of typical and attenuated FAP families

OBJECTIVES

Although enhanced colorectal surveillance is recommended for members of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) families, little is known about individual-level adherence behavior. This study examined factors associated with recent use of colorectal cancer (CRC) surveillance among FAP patients and their at-risk relatives.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study conducted a computer-assisted telephone survey among 150 members of 71 extended families with classic (FAP) or attenuated adenomatous polyposis (AFAP). Participants were enrolled in a university-based hereditary CRC registry or were first-degree relatives of enrollees. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Surveillance behavior varied by disease status. Fifty-four percent of 71 participants with a personal history of FAP and 42% of 79 at-risk relatives reported recent use of CRC surveillance recommendations. In multiple logistic regression analysis, lack of patient recall of provider recommendation for an endoscopic examination of the colon (OR 4.8, 95% CI 1.8-13.1), lack of health insurance or no reimbursement for CRC surveillance (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.2-10.5), and/or the belief that their relative risk of CRC is not increased (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.2-7.1) were independently associated with not having had a recent colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the known benefits of CRC surveillance, a substantial proportion of FAP family members did not have a recent colonoscopy or endoscopy. Interventions targeted at both clinicians and patients are needed to improve surveillance behavior. These data are also important in designing decision support tools to assist clinicians in identifying and managing high-risk patients.

If We Build It … Will They Come? – Establishing a Cancer Genetics Services Clinic for an Underserved Predominantly Latina Cohort

BACKGROUND

Cancer genetic counseling and testing is a standard of care option for appropriate families and can identify individuals at increased risk prior to diagnosis, when prevention or detection strategies are most effective. Despite documented efficacy of cancer risk reduction in high-risk individuals, underserved and minority individuals have a disproportionate cancer burden and limited access to genetic counseling.

METHODS

A needs assessment survey documented gaps in knowledge and interest in prevention. Satellite clinics were established at two indigent healthcare systems. Cancer genetics CME lectures were conducted and referral guidelines disseminated to clinicians who referred patients for counseling.

RESULTS

An increase in clinician knowledge was demonstrated post-CME and reflected by quality referrals. Eighty-eight percent of patients kept their appointments. In the predominantly Latina(6) (n=77) clinic population, 71.4% were affected with cancer, and 17 mutation positive families were identified. Preliminary data shows a positive impact on patients' motivation and behavior. The majority has expressed satisfaction and reduction in anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates feasibility and acceptability of cancer genetics services in this population, suggesting the potential to reduce cancer morbidity in underserved, high-risk families.

Assessing the Predictive Accuracy of hMLH1 and hMSH2 Mutation Probability Models

Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) is characterized by a susceptibility to colorectal and extra-colonic cancers. Several guidelines exist for the identification of families suspected of having HNPCC, however these guidelines lack adequate sensitivity and specificity. In an attempt to improve accuracy for the detection of individuals with HNPCC, the Wijnen pre-test probability model (1998) and Myriad Genetics Laboratory prevalence table (2004) were developed. Here we evaluate the Wijnen model and Myriad table at predicting the presence of a mutation in individuals undergoing genetic testing for HNPCC. Forty-nine patients who had undergone genetic testing for germline mutations in hMLH1 and/or hMSH2 were part of our analysis. Our results revealed that the revised Bethesda guidelines performed with the highest sensitivity for germline mutations (94.4%), however the specificity was low (12.9%). Using a 10.0% mutation probability threshold, the Wijnen model and Myriad table had sensitivities of 55.6 and 60.0%, respectively and specificities of 54.8 and 23.8%, respectively. The Wijnen model and Myriad table were poor predictors of mutation prevalence, which is shown by the areas underneath their corresponding receiver operator characteristic curves (0.616 and 0.400, respectively). The results of this study demonsrate that neither the Wijnen model nor the Myriad table are sensitive or specific enough to be used as the only indication when to offer genetic testing for HNPCC.

Characterization of a novel founder rearrangement mutation of BRCA1 in high-risk Hispanic families

10015

Background: Large rearrangements are estimated to account for 5–10% of all mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Prevalent founder rearrangement mutations have been described in European populations. We sought to identify rearrangements in the BRCA genes in a cohort of Hispanic patients. Methods: We identified 34 deleterious BRCA mutations via full sequence analysis among 110 unrelated high-risk Hispanic families enrolled in an IRB approved registry who underwent cancer risk assessment (CEBP 2005;14:1–6). DNA from 67 of 76 patients without an identifiable mutation was subjected to multiplexed quantitative differential PCR (MQDP, per B. Erickson and T. Scholl, Myriad Genetics Laboratory) for detection of large rearrangements. An apparent deletion of BRCA1 exons 9–12, indicated by a 50% loss of signal was identified by MQDP in 3 unrelated families (ASHG, 2005). Long range PCR resulted in the generation of a 2.7kb product in these samples, consistent with a deletion event of 15.1kb. This putative mutation was further characterized by cloning and sequencing the breakpoint in all 3 families. RNA splicing was evaluated by sequencing RT-PCR products from lymphoblastoid cell line RNA for each family. Results: Sequence analysis identified the breakpoint within Alu elements in introns 8 and 12, and all 3 unrelated families shared the same breakpoint. Analysis of cDNA demonstrated direct splicing of exons 8–13 predicting a frameshift mutation and premature truncation of the BRCA1 protein, thus confirming the deleterious nature of this mutation. Conclusion: We identified the same novel large deletion in three unrelated families of Mexican ancestry, suggesting potential founder effect. The frequency was 2.7% of the 110 high-risk Hispanic families screened for BRCA mutations, bringing the overall prevalence of deleterious mutations to 33.6%(37/110) in this cohort. This BRCA1 rearrangement may account for a substantial proportion of high-risk Hispanic families, and should be included in all subsequent studies of this ethnic group.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Clinical germline genetic testing for melanoma

Clinical genetic testing for mutations in CDKN2A (cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A), a melanoma susceptibility gene, is now available. The International Melanoma Genetics Consortium advocates that genetic testing for CDKN2A should be done only as part of a research protocol. Experience with genetic testing for other cancer-susceptibility genes indicates that CDKN2A testing has enormous potential for the prevention and detection of a deadly disease. However, clinicians need to understand the benefits and shortcomings of clinical CDKN2A testing so that it can be used advantageously. Here, we examine whether CDKN2A meets the recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) for cancer-susceptibility genetic testing. Although genetic testing for hereditary melanoma should, whenever possible, occur within research protocols, it might be successfully done outside of research protocols if attention is paid to selection, education, and counselling needs of patients; valid test interpretation; and the changing of medical management in appropriate individuals.