CHEK2 Founder Variants and Thyroid Cancer Risk

Background: Germline pathogenic variants in CHEK2 are associated with a moderate increase in the lifetime risk for breast cancer. Increased risk for other cancers, including non-medullary thyroid cancer (NMTC), has also been suggested. To date, data implicating CHEK2 variants in NMTC predisposition primarily derive from studies within Poland, driven by a splice site variant (c.444 + 1G>A) that is uncommon in other populations. In contrast, the predominant CHEK2 variants in non-Polish populations are c.1100del and c.470T>C/p.I157T, representing 61.1% and 63.8%, respectively, of all CHEK2 pathogenic variants in two large U.S.-based commercial laboratory datasets. To further delineate the impact of common CHEK2 variants on thyroid cancer, we aimed to investigate the association of three CHEK2 founder variants (c.444 + 1G>A, c.1100del, and c.470T>C/p.Ile157Thr) on NMTC susceptibility in three groups of unselected NMTC patients. Methods: The presence of three CHEK2 founder variants was assessed within three groups: (1) 1544 NMTC patients (and 1593 controls) from previously published genome-wide association study (GWAS) analyses, (2) 789 NMTC patients with germline exome sequencing (Oncology Research Information Exchange Network [ORIEN] Avatar), and (3) 499 NMTC patients with germline sequence data available in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). A case-control study design was utilized with odds ratios (ORs) calculated by comparison of all three groups with the Ohio State University GWAS control group. Results: The predominant Polish variant (c.444 + 1G>A) was present in only one case. The proportion of patients with c.1100del was 0.92% in the GWAS group, 1.65% in the ORIEN Avatar group, and 0.80% in the TCGA group. The ORs (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) for NMTC associated with c.1100del were 1.71 (0.73-4.29), 2.64 (0.95-7.63), and 2.5 (0.63-8.46), respectively. The proportion of patients with c.470T>C/p.I157T was 0.91% in the GWAS group, 0.76% in the ORIEN Avatar group, and 0.80% in the TCGA group, respectively. The ORs (with CIs) for NMTC associated with c.470T>C/p.I157T were 1.75 (0.74-4.39), 1.52 (0.42-4.96), and 2.31 (0.58-7.90), respectively. Conclusions: Our analyses of unselected patients with NMTC suggest that CHEK2 variants c.1100del and c.470T>C/p.I157T have only a modest impact on thyroid cancer risk. These results provide important information for providers regarding the relatively low magnitude of thyroid cancer risk associated with these CHEK2 variants.

Cancer Risks Associated With TP53 Pathogenic Variants: Maximum Likelihood Analysis of Extended Pedigrees for Diagnosis of First Cancers Beyond the Li-Fraumeni Syndrome Spectrum

PURPOSE

Establishing accurate age-related penetrance figures for the broad range of cancer types that occur in individuals harboring a pathogenic germline variant in the TP53 gene is essential to determine the most effective clinical management strategies. These figures also permit optimal use of cosegregation data for classification of TP53 variants of unknown significance. Penetrance estimation can easily be affected by bias from ascertainment criteria, an issue not commonly addressed by previous studies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a maximum likelihood penetrance estimation using full pedigree data from a multicenter study of 146 TP53-positive families, incorporating adjustment for the effect of ascertainment and population-specific background cancer risks. The analysis included pedigrees from Australia, Spain, and United States, with phenotypic information for 4,028 individuals.

RESULTS

Core Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) cancers (breast cancer, adrenocortical carcinoma, brain cancer, osteosarcoma, and soft tissue sarcoma) had the highest hazard ratios of all cancers analyzed in this study. The analysis also detected a significantly increased lifetime risk for a range of cancers not previously formally associated with TP53 pathogenic variant status, including colorectal, gastric, lung, pancreatic, and ovarian cancers. The cumulative risk of any cancer type by age 50 years was 92.4% (95% CI, 82.2 to 98.3) for females and 59.7% (95% CI, 39.9 to 81.3) for males. Females had a 63.3% (95% CI, 35.6 to 90.1) cumulative risk of developing breast cancer by age 50 years.

CONCLUSION

The results from maximum likelihood analysis confirm the known high lifetime risk for the core LFS-associated cancer types providing new risk estimates and indicate significantly increased lifetime risks for several additional cancer types. Accurate cancer risk estimates will help refine clinical recommendations for TP53 pathogenic variant carriers and improve TP53 variant classification.

Experiences of patients and family members with follow-up care, information needs and provider support after identification of Lynch Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Lynch Syndrome is among the most common hereditary cancer syndromes and requires ongoing cancer surveillance, repeated screenings and potential risk-reducing surgeries. Despite the importance of continued surveillance, there is limited understanding of patient experiences after initial testing and counseling, the barriers or facilitators they experience adhering to recommendations, and how they want to receive information over time.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, observational study was conducted among 127 probands and family members who had received genetic testing for Lynch Syndrome. We conducted semi-structured interviews to determine proband and family member experiences after receiving genetic testing results including their surveillance and screening practices, information needs, and interactions with health care providers. Both closed-ended and open-ended data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Both probands (96.9%) and family members (76.8%) received recommendations for follow-up screening and all probands (100%) and most family members (98.2%) who tested positive had completed at least one screening. Facilitators to screening included receiving screening procedure reminders and the ease of making screening and surveillance appointments. Insurance coverage to pay for screenings was a frequent concern especially for those under 50 years of age. Participants commented that their primary care providers were often not knowledgeable about Lynch Syndrome and surveillance recommendations; this presented a hardship in navigating ongoing surveillance and updated information. Participants preferred information from a knowledgeable health care provider or a trusted internet source over social media or support groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Probands and family members receiving genetic testing for Lynch Syndrome generally adhered to initial screening and surveillance recommendations. However, factors such as insurance coverage and difficulty finding a knowledgeable healthcare provider presented barriers to receiving recommended follow-up care. There is an opportunity to improve care through better transitions in care, procedures to keep primary care providers informed of surveillance guidelines, and practices so that patients receive reminders and facilitated appointment setting for ongoing screening and surveillance at the time they are due.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic, Version 2.2024

The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic focus primarily on assessment of pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants associated with increased risk of breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer, including BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, PALB2, PTEN, and TP53, and recommended approaches to genetic counseling/testing and care strategies in individuals with these P/LP variants. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize important updates regarding: (1) a new section for transgender, nonbinary and gender diverse people who have a hereditary predisposition to cancer focused on risk reduction strategies for ovarian cancer, uterine cancer, prostate cancer, and breast cancer; and (2) testing criteria and management associated with TP53 P/LP variants and Li-Fraumeni syndrome.

Increasing Skin Cancer Prevention in Young Adults: the Cumulative Impact of Personalized UV Photography and MC1R Genetic Testing

Skin cancer has become increasingly common among young adults; however, this population does not consistently adhere to recommended methods for preventing the disease. Interventions in college settings have relied on appearance-focused appeals and have not been able to examine the cumulative effect of multiple behavior change and skin cancer risk communication strategies. The goal of the current study was to examine the unique and combined impacts of personalized ultraviolet (UV) radiation photographs, genetic testing for skin cancer risk, and general skin cancer prevention education. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: (1) skin cancer prevention education, (2) education + UV photo, (3) education + genetic testing, and (4) education + UV photo + genetic testing. Self-reported sun protection, tanning, and sunburn were assessed at baseline, immediately post-intervention, and 1 month post-intervention. The findings indicated benefits of the interventions to skin cancer prevention behaviors in the overall sample; however, the combined (UV photo + genetic testing) intervention had the most consistent positive effects on behaviors. Intervention effects were distinct across seasons. These results suggest that interventions containing multiple skin cancer risk communication strategies hold promise in benefitting health-promoting behavior changes in an at-risk, young adult population.Trial Registration Number: NCT03979872; Registered 6/5/2019.

Multiple Germline Events Contribute to Cancer Development in Patients with Li-Fraumeni Syndrome

Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is an autosomal dominant cancer-predisposition disorder. Approximately 70% of individuals who fit the clinical definition of LFS harbor a pathogenic germline variant in the TP53 tumor suppressor gene. However, the remaining 30% of patients lack a TP53 variant and even among variant TP53 carriers, approximately 20% remain cancer-free. Understanding the variable cancer penetrance and phenotypic variability in LFS is critical to developing rational approaches to accurate, early tumor detection and risk-reduction strategies. We leveraged family-based whole-genome sequencing and DNA methylation to evaluate the germline genomes of a large, multi-institutional cohort of patients with LFS (n = 396) with variant (n = 374) or wildtype TP53 (n = 22). We identified alternative cancer-associated genetic aberrations in 8/14 wildtype TP53 carriers who developed cancer. Among variant TP53 carriers, 19/49 who developed cancer harbored a pathogenic variant in another cancer gene. Modifier variants in the WNT signaling pathway were associated with decreased cancer incidence. Furthermore, we leveraged the noncoding genome and methylome to identify inherited epimutations in genes including ASXL1, ETV6, and LEF1 that confer increased cancer risk. Using these epimutations, we built a machine learning model that can predict cancer risk in patients with LFS with an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.725 (0.633-0.810).

Significance

Our study clarifies the genomic basis for the phenotypic variability in LFS and highlights the immense benefits of expanding genetic and epigenetic testing of patients with LFS beyond TP53. More broadly, it necessitates the dissociation of hereditary cancer syndromes as single gene disorders and emphasizes the importance of understanding these diseases in a holistic manner as opposed to through the lens of a single gene.

Abstract 6074: Germline and somatic genomic profiling of urothelial carcinoma

Urothelial carcinoma (UC) presents most frequently as bladder cancer and is the most common cancer of the urinary system in the United States. UC relapse and progression are common and impose a significant negative impact on the lives of patients and healthcare resources. To elucidate the biological mechanisms of UC and find novel biomarkers, we analyzed the clinical and genomic data in the Oncology Research Information Exchange Network (ORIEN). We conducted gene-based and gene-set based association tests on rare germline variants comparing the exome sequencing of 336 UC patients and genome sequencing of 366 healthy controls (42 unrelated individuals from the Centre d'Etudes du Polymorphisme Humain [CEPH] families and 324 from the University of Utah Heritage 1000 [H1K] Projects). The analysis of loss-of-function (LoF) variants revealed that the forkhead box (FOX) J2 gene set was significantly associated with UC at the genome-wide level (Bonferroni-corrected p-value=0.01). Genes in this gene set contain a motif that matches the FOXJ2 transcription factor binding site. Firth-penalized Cox proportional hazard regression on overall survival identified LoF variants in genes down-regulated in naive CD8 T cells to be associated with worse prognosis (Bonferroni-corrected p-value=0.032, hazard ratio=28.2, and 95% confidence interval 6.66 to 119.0). In exome sequencing of tumor tissues, we searched for driver genes and pathways by testing for higher variant allelic fractions than the genome average. The tests yielded eleven genes with genome-wide significance (Table 1). By gene set analysis using the MSigDB Hallmark database, significant pathways included the P53 pathway (p<2 × 10−16), Wnt beta-catenin signaling (p<2 × 10−16), E2F targets (p=8 × 10−13), PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling (4 × 10−7), and apoptosis (p=9 × 10−7). These results reveal the germline predisposition variants and somatic oncogenic drivers in UC and suggest immune evasion as a contributing factor for poor clinical outcomes in UC patients.

Table 1. Genes with high allelic fractions Gene P-value Number of Variants TP53 <2 × 10−16 203 RB1 2.42 × 10−16 67 ELF3 2.06 × 10−7 38 TSC1 4.05 × 10−7 32 KMT2D 7.59 × 10−7 91 ZFP36L1 8.80 × 10−7 33 CDKN1A 2.47 × 10−6 40 FGFR3 1.11 × 10−5 37 ARID1A 1.28 × 10−5 62 SMARCA4 1.53 × 10−5 17 PIK3CA 2.00 × 10−5 53

Citation Format: Bing-Jian Feng, Wendy Kohlmann, David A. Nix, Aaron Atkinson, Kenneth M. Boucher, Courtney Carroll, Jill Kolesar, Eric A. Singer, Stephen B. Edge, Kamal Sahu, Alejandro Sanchez, Mikaela Larson, Michelle L. Churchman, Laura Graham, John D. Carpten, Yousef Zakharia, Lindsey Byrne, Rohit K. Jain, Kenneth G. Nepple, Ahmad Shabsigh, Jad Chahoud, Sumati Gupta. Germline and somatic genomic profiling of urothelial carcinoma. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 6074.

A need to tailor surveillance based on family history: describing a highly penetrant familial paraganglioma kindred with an SDHD pathogenic variant

Pathogenic variants (PVs) in the SDHD gene increase risk for paragangliomas (PGL)/pheochromocytomas, renal cell carcinomas, and gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Penetrance in individuals with SDHD PVs varies in reported research from 40-70%, and there is limited evidence of specific genotype risks. This study aims to characterize a multi-generational family with SDHD p.Trp43* PVs and potential genotype-phenotype considerations for surveillance. Individuals with a paternally inherited SDHD p.Trp43*(c.129G > A) PV were identified. Genetic, medical and family histories were abstracted, including clinical characteristics, tumor histories, and treatment approaches. Eleven individuals with the SDHD PV in the same kindred were diagnosed with 41 SDHx-related tumors across all family members. Eight individuals developed 27 head and neck PGL of varying origins, and seven individuals developed tumors outside of the head and neck region. Many individuals had multiple tumors, and age of first tumor diagnosis ranged from age 10 to age 45 years old. Individuals with SDHD p.Trp43* variants may have higher risks for SDHx related tumors than other SDHD variants. Prioritizing identification of at-risk individuals and initiating surveillance tailored to family history is recommended given the rate of multiple tumors found in one familial branch of individuals under 18 years old. Individuals with strong family histories of PGL at young ages with this PV will benefit from tailored surveillance recommendations.

Predictors of Women's Intentions to Communicate Updated Genetic Test Results to Immediate and Extended Family Members

INTRODUCTION

Many individuals who previously received negative genetic test results are eligible for updated testing. This study examined intention to communicate updated genetic test results to relatives in participants who previously received negative genetic test results.

METHODS

Women with a personal or family history of breast or ovarian cancer who tested negative for BRCA1/2 before 2013 were enrolled between April 2018 and October 2019. Proportions were calculated to assess intention to communicate updated genetic test results to living immediate family, extended family, and all family. Potential predictors of intentions from the theory of planned behavior (attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control) were assessed. The three outcomes were analyzed using generalized linear models with a quasi-binomial probability distribution.

RESULTS

110 women completed the baseline assessment prior to updated testing. Participants intended to communicate genetic test results to 90% of immediate family, 51% of extended family, and 66% of all living relatives. Participants with higher subjective norms (aOR = 1.93, 95% CI: 1.08-3.57) had higher intentions to communicate genetic test results to extended family, while participants with more positive attitudes (aOR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.01-1.60) had higher intentions to communicate to all family. Placing higher importance on genetic information was associated with higher intentions to communicate to immediate family (aOR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.06-1.83). Lower subjective numeracy was associated with higher intentions to communicate to extended family (aOR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.32-0.76).

CONCLUSION

Attitudes and subjective norms were predictors of intention to communicate updated genetic information to at-risk biological relatives, and predictors may vary by degree of relationship.

Barriers to family history collection among Spanish-speaking primary care patients: a BRIDGE qualitative study

Objectives

Family history is an important tool for assessing disease risk, and tailoring recommendations for screening and genetic services referral. This study explored barriers to family history collection with Spanish-speaking patients.

Methods

This qualitative study was conducted in two US healthcare systems. We conducted semi-structured interviews with medical assistants, physicians, and interpreters with experience collecting family history for Spanish-speaking patients.

Results

The most common patient-level barrier was the perception that some Spanish-speaking patients had limited knowledge of family history. Interpersonal communication barriers related to dialectical differences and decisions about using formal interpreters vs. Spanish-speaking staff. Organizational barriers included time pressures related to using interpreters, and ad hoc workflow adaptations for Spanish-speaking patients that might leave gaps in family history collection.

Conclusions

This study identified multi-level barriers to family history collection with Spanish-speaking patients in primary care. Findings suggest that a key priority to enhance communication would be to standardize processes for working with interpreters.

Innovation

To improve communication with and care provided to Spanish-speaking patients, there is a need to increase healthcare provider awareness about implicit bias, to address ad hoc workflow adjustments within practice settings, to evaluate the need for professional interpreter services, and to improve digital tools to facilitate family history collection.

'I had a bigger cancer risk than I thought…': The experience of receiving personalized risk information as part of a skin cancer prevention intervention in the college setting

BACKGROUND

Diagnoses of both melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancers are becoming increasingly common among young adults. Interventions in this population are a priority because they do not consistently follow skin cancer prevention recommendations.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of the current study was to examine college students' perspectives on and experience with receiving a skin cancer prevention intervention that provided personalized skin cancer risk feedback in the form of an ultraviolet (UV) photograph, the results of genetic testing for common skin cancer risk variants, and/or general skin cancer prevention education.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were conducted with 38 college students who received a skin cancer prevention intervention. The interview covered students' feelings about their personal skin cancer risk information, the impact of the intervention on their skin cancer risk perceptions, actions or intentions to act with regard to their sun protection practices and feedback for improvement of the intervention content or delivery.

RESULTS

Participants reported that different intervention components contributed to increased awareness of their sun protection behaviours, shifts in cognitions about and motivation to implement sun protection strategies and reported changes to their skin cancer prevention strategies.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that college students are interested in and responsive to these types of multicomponent skin cancer preventive interventions. Further, students demonstrate some motivation and intentionality toward changing their skin cancer risk behaviour in the short term.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Participants involved in this study were members of the public (undergraduate students) who were involved in a skin cancer prevention intervention, then participated in semistructured interviews, which provided the data analysed for this study.

Identifying Patients Who Meet Criteria for Genetic Testing of Hereditary Cancers Based on Structured and Unstructured Family Health History Data in the Electronic Health Record: Natural Language Processing Approach

BACKGROUND

Family health history has been recognized as an essential factor for cancer risk assessment and is an integral part of many cancer screening guidelines, including genetic testing for personalized clinical management strategies. However, manually identifying eligible candidates for genetic testing is labor intensive.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop a natural language processing (NLP) pipeline and assess its contribution to identifying patients who meet genetic testing criteria for hereditary cancers based on family health history data in the electronic health record (EHR). We compared an algorithm that uses structured data alone with structured data augmented using NLP.

METHODS

Algorithms were developed based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for genetic testing for hereditary breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and colorectal cancers. The NLP-augmented algorithm uses both structured family health history data and the associated unstructured free-text comments. The algorithms were compared with a reference standard of 100 patients with a family health history in the EHR.

RESULTS

Regarding identifying the reference standard patients meeting the NCCN criteria, the NLP-augmented algorithm compared with the structured data algorithm yielded a significantly higher recall of 0.95 (95% CI 0.9-0.99) versus 0.29 (95% CI 0.19-0.40) and a precision of 0.99 (95% CI 0.96-1.00) versus 0.81 (95% CI 0.65-0.95). On the whole data set, the NLP-augmented algorithm extracted 33.6% more entities, resulting in 53.8% more patients meeting the NCCN criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the structured data algorithm, the NLP-augmented algorithm based on both structured and unstructured family health history data in the EHR increased the number of patients identified as meeting the NCCN criteria for genetic testing for hereditary breast or ovarian and colorectal cancers.

Discrepancies between tumor genomic profiling and germline genetic testing

BACKGROUND

Tumor genomic profiling (TGP) often incidentally identifies germline pathogenic variants (PVs) associated with cancer predisposition syndromes. Methods used by somatic testing laboratories, including germline analysis, differ from designated germline laboratories that have optimized the identification of germline PVs. This study evaluated discrepancies between somatic and germline testing results, and their impact on patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Chart reviews were carried out at a single institution for patients who had both somatic and designated germline genetic testing. Cases with discrepant results in which germline PVs were not detected by the somatic laboratory or in which variant classification differed are summarized.

RESULTS

TGP was carried out on 2811 cancer patients, 600 of whom also underwent designated germline genetic testing. Germline PVs were identified for 109 individuals. Discrepancies between germline genetic testing and tumor profiling reports were identified in 20 cases, including 14 PVs identified by designated germline genetic testing laboratories that were not reported by somatic testing laboratories and six variants with discrepant classifications between the designated germline and somatic testing laboratories. Three PVs identified by designated germline laboratories are targets for poly adenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and resulted in different treatment options. Of the PVs identified by designated germline laboratories, 60% (n = 12) were in genes with established associations to the patients' cancer, and 40% of the PVs were incidental. The majority (90%) of all discrepant findings, both contributory and incidental, changed management recommendations for these patients, highlighting the importance of comprehensive germline assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Methods used by somatic laboratories, regardless of the inclusion of germline analysis, differ from those of designated germline laboratories for identifying germline PVs. Unrecognized germline PVs may harm patients by missing hereditary syndromes and targeted therapy opportunities (e.g. anti-programmed cell death protein 1 immunotherapy, PARP inhibitors). Clinicians should refer patients who meet the criteria for genetic evaluation regardless of somatic testing outcomes.

Abstract 1428: DNA methylation predicts early onset of primary tumor in patients with Li-Fraumeni syndrome

Background: Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is an autosomal dominant cancer predisposition syndrome. Approximately 80% of individuals with LFS harbor a germline TP53 pathogenic variant rendering them susceptible to a wide spectrum of early-onset malignancies. A comprehensive surveillance regimen termed the ‘Toronto Protocol’, has recently been adopted for early tumor detection, demonstrating significant improvement in survival among TP53 pathogenic variant carriers. However, the protocol’s “one-size-fits-all” approach fails to consider an individual patient's risk of cancer. We built a machine learning model that predicts early-onset of primary tumors in LFS by estimating the probability of cancer onset before the age of six years, leveraging patient peripheral blood leukocyte methylation profiles.

Methods: We built a gradient-boosted tree model to predict the probability of cancer onset before the age of six using methylation data from 288 TP53 pathogenic variant carriers. An external test set of 82 TP53 pathogenic variant carriers was used to validate our model. To increase the signal-to-noise ratio, methylation probes associated with TP53 status were retained and probes associated with aging were removed. In our study, we were primarily interested in minimizing the false negative rate (i.e. to reduce the number of patients who developed cancer before the age of six but were undetected by our algorithm.

Findings: We correctly predicted whether the first tumor will occur before the age of six with an accuracy of 79% in our external test set. Importantly, our model classified 90% of the patients that developed cancer prior to the age of six correctly. In addition, 81% of the individuals without cancer in the external test set were predicted correctly.

Interpretation: Our tool provides additional value to clinicians in stratifying patients into low- or high-risk groups of developing early-onset malignancies, and helps inform rational use of clinical surveillance tools for early cancer detection, with the ultimate aim to improve overall patient outcomes.

Citation Format: Vallijah Subasri, Benjamin Brew, Lauren Erdman, Tanya Guha, Jordan R. Hansford, Elizabeth Cairney, Carol Portwine, Christine Elser, Jonathan L. Finlay, Kim E. Nichols, Wendy Kohlmann, Noa Alon, Ana Novokmet, Ledia Brunga, Anita Villani, Kelvin C. de Andrade, Payal P. Khincha, Sharon A. Savage, Joshua D. Schiffman, David Malkin, Anna Goldenberg. DNA methylation predicts early onset of primary tumor in patients with Li-Fraumeni syndrome [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 1428.

Comparing pretest video genetic education for prostate cancer patients: Do patients need assistance?

5061

Background: Expanded germline genetic testing recommendations for individuals with prostate cancer (PCa) have resulted in increased demand for pre-test genetic education. As a result, alternative service delivery models in genetic counseling (GC) have been suggested. Previous research has shown no difference in genetic testing uptake when video genetic education (VGE) is used rather than face-to-face counseling. However, data is limited when evaluating how VGE is delivered to patients. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of pre-test VGE on genetic testing uptake when facilitated by a GC assistant or self-completed by the patient. Methods: PCa patients referred for GC were contacted for pre-test VGE. Patients were randomized to undergo VGE with a GC assistant via Zoom (assistant-led) or perform VGE on their own via email instructions (patient-led). Assistant-led VGE was scheduled via standard of care, and patient-led VGE involved electronic and phone contact. In both arms, pre-test VGE included administrating family history collection via electronic software and viewing of informational genetics video. VGE completion and genetic testing uptake was the primary outcome measured for all participants. Initial pilot data was presented previously. This analysis represents the entire study period outcome. Data analysis used t-test, Fisher’s exact and chi square. Results: From 10/1/2020-12/31/2021, 266 PCa patients were referred. In total, 254 were randomized, with 130 in the assistant-led intervention and 124 randomized to the patient-led arm. Technological limitations, loss to follow up, and procedural withdrawals resulted in 41 (31.5%) patients in the assistant-led arm and 65 (52.4%) in the self-led arm. The primary reason for discontinuing the process was lack of patient response to contact to schedule their genetics visit (n = 109, 35 patient-led, 74 assistant-led). There was significantly more loss to follow up in the assistant-led arm versus the self-led arm (p < 0.001). Of those who completed VGE, the median age was 66 years, with no difference between the two arms (p = 0.66). Participants primary identified as white (n = 96, 91%) and non-Hispanic (n = 100, 94%). There was no difference in uptake of genetic testing (p = 0.09) between patient and assistant led VGE. Conclusions: A randomized intervention suggests no difference in genetic testing uptake when pre-test VGE occurs with an assistant or is patient-led. Analyses of satisfaction, decision conflict, and knowledge are needed to evaluate if patient-led VGE is a suitable alternative to GC. Loss to follow up given standard of care scheduling approaches for assistant-led VGE suggests pre-test VGE may be better delivered during oncology visits. Additional evaluation of the facilitators and barriers, in addition to larger multi-center studies, are required to consider patient-led pre-test VGE as a primary method of pre-testing genetic education.

Impact of COVID-19 on individuals with paraganglioma/pheochromocytoma history and/or hereditary risk

10613

Background: Patients with paraganglioma/pheochromocytoma (PPGL) or hereditary predisposition to PPGL often need screening with biochemical labs, imaging and physical exam. Given the rarity of PPGL and hereditary PPGL, care is often provided through specialty centers. Subsequently, patients may have experienced restrictions on travel and delayed scheduling of non-elective procedures due to COVID-19. This study aimed to analyze the impact of COVID-19 on seeking PPGL management. Methods: Patients with a personal history of PPGL or hereditary PPGL risk from the University of Michigan, Brigham Women’s Hospital, and Huntsman Cancer Institute were sent a survey in 2021. The survey included questions regarding tumor history (Y/N), gene status, demographics, and experience with COVID. The survey assessed whether they missed any exams related to PPGL diagnosis or screening. Comparative analyses utilized regression and chi-square tests. Patient factors measured in analyses evaluated COVID surveillance (labs, imaging, doctor visit) as the primary outcome and age, institution, gene status, sex, and PPGL history as predicting variables. Results: In total, 241 respondents across three institutions completed the survey. The cohort was primarily female (n = 158, 65.6%). A majority of the cohort identified as White (n = 222, 92%) and non-Hispanic (n = 226, 93.8%). PPGL history was reported in 158 patients (65.6%), 43 of which were pheochromocytoma and 113 were paraganglioma, primarily in the head and neck (n = 78). At time of survey completion, 209 (87%) respondents answered COVID-related questions. Thirty-nine respondents (19.2%) reported missing doctor visits, while 31 (15.3%) report missing HPPGL imaging and 33 (16.3%) report missing lab tests. There were no differences by institution (p > 0.05) on patient reported missed visits. Logistic regression analysis showed no difference in missing visits based on having a hereditary PPGL predisposition gene or sex of respondent (all p-values > 0.05). There was no difference based on PPGL history, though it is unknown if patients missed PGL follow-up or screening. Individuals who missed imaging (Y/N) were more likely to report missing their lab tests (OR = 1.8, p < 0.01) and doctor visit (OR = 1.25, p < 0.01). Age was a significant predictor for missing doctor visits (p = 0.02) with an odds ratio of 1.002 per 1 year increase in age. Conclusions: Though institutions had different COVID-19 restrictions and guidelines by state, there was no difference on missing surveillance or screening. Over 15% of respondents reported missing at least one aspect of PPGL care, indicating a need to re-engage those with PPGL and hereditary PPGL to return to typical screening and surveillance. Patients who miss one aspect of surveillance are likely to have missed other aspects of surveillance and will require evaluation of all aspects of screening to return up to date on needed visits and procedures.

Non-Melanoma Skin Cancers and Other Cutaneous Manifestations in Bone Marrow Failure Syndromes and Rare DNA Repair Disorders

Although most non-melanoma skin cancers are felt to be sporadic in origin, these tumors do play a role in several cancer predisposition syndromes. The manifestations of skin cancers in these hereditary populations can include diagnosis at extremely early ages and/or multiple primary cancers, as well as tumors at less common sites. Awareness of baseline skin cancer risks for these individuals is important, particularly in the setting of treatments that may compromise the immune system and further increase risk of cutaneous malignancies. Additionally, diagnosis of these disorders and management of non-cutaneous manifestations of these diseases have profound implications for both the patient and their family. This review highlights the current literature on the diagnosis, features, and non-melanoma skin cancer risks associated with lesser-known cancer predisposition syndromes, including bone marrow failure disorders, genomic instability disorders, and base excision repair disorders.

Considerations for Germline Testing in Melanoma: Updates in Behavioral Change and Pancreatic Surveillance for Carriers of CDKN2A Pathogenic Variants

The largest proportion of hereditary melanoma cases are due to pathogenic variants (PVs) in the CDKN2A/p16 gene, which account for 20%-40% of familial melanomas and confer up to a 30%-70% lifetime risk for melanoma in individuals with these variants. In addition, PVs in the CDKN2A gene also increase risk for pancreatic cancer (~5-24% lifetime risk). Individuals with PVs in the CDKN2A gene also tend to have an earlier onset of cancer. Despite these known risks, uptake of germline testing has been limited in the past, largely due to perceptions of limited benefit for patients. Prevention recommendations have been developed for individuals with CDKN2A PVs as well the providers who care for them. On the patient level, behavioral modifications regarding melanoma prevention such as wearing sunscreen, limiting prolonged sun exposure and practicing general sun safety can help reduce risks. Germline testing can provide motivation for some individuals to adhere to these lifestyle changes. On the provider level, pancreatic cancer surveillance for individuals with CDKN2A PVs has been increasingly endorsed by expert consensus, although the efficacy of these surveillance methods remains under study. This review summarizes the updated surveillance guidelines for individuals with CDKN2A PVs and explores the impact of genetic counseling and testing in influencing behavioral changes in these individuals.

Inherited TP53 Variants and Risk of Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Inherited germline TP53 pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants (gTP53) cause autosomal dominant multicancer predisposition including Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS). However, there is no known association of prostate cancer with gTP53.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether gTP53 predisposes to prostate cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multi-institutional retrospective study characterizes prostate cancer incidence in a cohort of LFS males and gTP53 prevalence in a prostate cancer cohort.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

We evaluated the spectrum of gTP53 variants and clinical features associated with prostate cancer.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

We identified 31 prostate cancer cases among 163 adult LFS males, including 26 of 54 aged ≥50 yr. Among 117 LFS males without prostate cancer at the time of genetic testing, six were diagnosed with prostate cancer over a median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 3.0 (1.3-7.2) yr of follow-up, a 25-fold increased risk (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.2-55; p < 0.0001). We identified gTP53 in 38 of 6850 males (0.6%) in the prostate cancer cohort, a relative risk 9.1-fold higher than that of population controls (95% CI 6.2-14; p < 0.0001; gnomAD). We observed hotspots at the sites of attenuated variants not associated with classic LFS. Two-thirds of available gTP53 prostate tumors had somatic inactivation of the second TP53 allele. Among gTP53 prostate cancer cases in this study, the median age at diagnosis was 56 (IQR: 51-62) yr, 44% had Gleason ≥8 tumors, and 29% had advanced disease at diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Complementary analyses of prostate cancer incidence in LFS males and gTP53 prevalence in prostate cancer cohorts suggest that gTP53 predisposes to aggressive prostate cancer. Prostate cancer should be considered as part of LFS screening protocols and TP53 considered in germline prostate cancer susceptibility testing.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Inherited pathogenic variants in the TP53 gene are likely to predispose men to aggressive prostate cancer.

Impact of pretest video genetic education in prostate cancer patients: Do patients need us?

68

Background: Germline genetic testing criteria for individuals with prostate cancer (PCa) are expanding. Alternative genetic service models are needed to meet increased need for genetic testing. Studies have shown no difference in genetic testing uptake, satisfaction, or knowledge when patients undergo face-to-face genetic counseling compared to pre-test video genetic education (VGE). Data is limited comparing options for how video genetic education is delivered. This study evaluated the impact of pre-test VGE when facilitated by a genetic counseling assistant (assistant-led) or self-completed by the patient (patient-led). Methods: Individuals with PCa referred for genetic counseling received pre-test VGE. Patients were randomized so that this process involved meeting with a genetic counseling assistant or completed at the patient’s convenience via email instructions. Pre-test VGE included family history completion via electronic software and viewing of informational video. VGE completion and genetic testing uptake were measured for all participants. Questionnaires regarding satisfaction, and knowledge were optional for participants after VGE completion. Data was analyzed using t-test and Fisher’s exact. Results: Eighty-one individuals referred for genetic counseling from October 2020-March 2021, and 78 individuals were randomized (1:1) to assistant-led or patient-led VGE, with 39 individuals in each arm. After removing patients for technological limitations, loss to follow up, and procedural withdrawals, there were 18 patients in the assistant-led arm, and 16 patients in the patient-led arm. The primary reason for discontinuing the process was lack of response to phone and electronic contacts to schedule their genetics visit (n = 22). The median age was 64.5 years, with no difference between the two arms (p = 0.698). Participants identified primarily as white/Caucasian (n = 32, 94%). In the assistant-led group, all participants elected to undergo germline genetic testing and 13 (81%) opted for genetic testing in the patient-led group. There was no difference in genetic testing uptake between the two arms (p = 0.094). Nine patients in the patient-led group and eight patients in the assistant-led group completed the questionnaires. There was no difference in satisfaction with their VGE experience (p = 0.815) or knowledge using the KnowGene scale (p = 0.120). Conclusions: Preliminary data suggests there is no difference in genetic testing uptake when pre-test VGE is facilitated by a genetic counseling assistant or self-led by the patient. Given no preliminary differences in satisfaction and knowledge, patient-led pre-test VGE may serve as a viable option prior to germline testing in PCa patients. Additional research is needed with larger sample size. Furthermore, evaluation of the facilitators and barriers of VGE is needed as there was significant drop off in completion of video pre-test VGE.

Inherited germline variants in urothelial cancer: A multicenter whole-exome sequencing analysis

451

Background: Outside of Lynch syndrome, few genetic factors have been associated with urothelial cancer (UC). This project seeks to describe the frequency of germline variants in a multi-center UC cohort. Methods: Patients diagnosed with UC from 1980 to 2019 and consented to the Total Cancer Care protocol by members of the Oncology Research Information Exchange Network (ORIEN) were included in the study. The ORIEN program includes a convenience sample of cases with both germline and tumor samples available, though this analysis was germline only. Whole exome sequencing data were analyzed using a GATK best practices for germline variant analysis. A series of quality control (allele frequency > = 0.3, read depth > = 20, genotype quality > = 20), annotation, functional impact (loss of function/splicing), and region (cancer predisposition genes/pathways) filters were applied to identify variants of significant consequence. Results: 348 exomes were evaluated. This identified 60 variants classified as pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) and 17 novel, high impact variants in genes associated with high, moderate, or recessively inherited cancer risk in 77 individuals (22.1%). 15 (4.5%) had P/LP variants in genes associated with a high or moderate cancer risk, and 10 (3%) of these variants were considered to be clinically actionable with associated with cancer screening, risk reduction or treatment recommendations. The high/moderate risk genes with P/LP variants included CHEK2 (n = 5), FANCM (n = 4), MSH6 (n = 2) and single cases of MSH2, BRCA2, ERCC3, and BRIP1. The average age of diagnosis in those with and without a high/moderate risk P/LP variant was 67.6 (57-80 yrs) and 68.9 (45-91 yrs). Family history of cancer was reported for 73% of those with a germline LP/PV and 60% of those without, but this trend was not significant (p =.44). Conclusions: Individuals with UC have a high frequency of germline variants that warrant further study for association with cancer risk. A smaller, but significant portion also carry germline variants that may be clinically relevant to them and/or family members. Currently UC is not included in genetic testing criteria. This study adds to the growing body of research indicating that diverse types of cancer patients harbor germline variants. Strategies for expanding testing should be considered.

Patient Interactions With an Automated Conversational Agent Delivering Pretest Genetics Education: Descriptive Study

Background

Cancer genetic testing to assess an individual’s cancer risk and to enable genomics-informed cancer treatment has grown exponentially in the past decade. Because of this continued growth and a shortage of health care workers, there is a need for automated strategies that provide high-quality genetics services to patients to reduce the clinical demand for genetics providers. Conversational agents have shown promise in managing mental health, pain, and other chronic conditions and are increasingly being used in cancer genetic services. However, research on how patients interact with these agents to satisfy their information needs is limited.

Objective

Our primary aim is to assess user interactions with a conversational agent for pretest genetics education.

Methods

We conducted a feasibility study of user interactions with a conversational agent who delivers pretest genetics education to primary care patients without cancer who are eligible for cancer genetic evaluation. The conversational agent provided scripted content similar to that delivered in a pretest genetic counseling visit for cancer genetic testing. Outside of a core set of information delivered to all patients, users were able to navigate within the chat to request additional content in their areas of interest. An artificial intelligence–based preprogrammed library was also established to allow users to ask open-ended questions to the conversational agent. Transcripts of the interactions were recorded. Here, we describe the information selected, time spent to complete the chat, and use of the open-ended question feature. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative measures, and thematic analyses were used for qualitative responses.

Results

We invited 103 patients to participate, of which 88.3% (91/103) were offered access to the conversational agent, 39% (36/91) started the chat, and 32% (30/91) completed the chat. Most users who completed the chat indicated that they wanted to continue with genetic testing (21/30, 70%), few were unsure (9/30, 30%), and no patient declined to move forward with testing. Those who decided to test spent an average of 10 (SD 2.57) minutes on the chat, selected an average of 1.87 (SD 1.2) additional pieces of information, and generally did not ask open-ended questions. Those who were unsure spent 4 more minutes on average (mean 14.1, SD 7.41; P=.03) on the chat, selected an average of 3.67 (SD 2.9) additional pieces of information, and asked at least one open-ended question.

Conclusions

The pretest chat provided enough information for most patients to decide on cancer genetic testing, as indicated by the small number of open-ended questions. A subset of participants were still unsure about receiving genetic testing and may require additional education or interpersonal support before making a testing decision. Conversational agents have the potential to become a scalable alternative for pretest genetics education, reducing the clinical demand on genetics providers.

Physicians' strategies for using family history data: having the data is not the same as using the data

Objective

To identify needs in a clinical decision support tool development by exploring how primary care providers currently collect and use family health history (FHH).

Design

Survey questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were administered to a mix of primary and specialty care clinicians within the University of Utah Health system (40 surveys, 12 interviews).

Results

Three key themes emerged regarding providers' collection and use of FHH: (1) Strategies for collecting FHH vary by level of effort; (2) Documentation practices extend beyond the electronic health record's dedicated FHH module; and (3) Providers desire feedback from genetic services consultation and are uncertain how to refer patients to genetic services.

Conclusion

Study findings highlight the varying degrees of engagement that providers have with collecting FHH. Improving the integration of FHH into workflow, and providing decision support, as well as links and tools to help providers better utilize genetic counseling may improve patient care.

Uptake of genetic counseling and multi-gene panel testing among women in the Intermountain West with previous negative BRCA1 and BRCA2 results contacted for updated testing

Women with a personal history of breast or ovarian cancer who previously had BRCA1/2 testing now have the opportunity for additional genetic risk information through multi-gene panel testing. However, little is known about women's receptivity to further contact and uptake of genetic counseling and updated genetic testing. Utilizing a clinic database to identify potential participants, we prospectively contacted women in the United States with a personal and/or family history of breast or ovarian cancer who had negative BRCA1/2 testing, which was performed primarily between 2011 and 2018. Eligible and interested participants were scheduled for a genetic counseling appointment to discuss updated genetic testing using a multi-gene panel. We attempted to contact 455 participants, screened 203 (45%), and 103 (23%) completed a pre-test genetic counseling visit to discuss updated testing. Of these, 88 participants had updated multi-gene panel testing. Participants had an average age of 59 years, and most (78%) had breast cancer with an average age of 45 at diagnosis. The majority (97%) of participants were white. Of participants who underwent panel testing, 13% (n = 11) had at least one pathogenic variant identified. Most participants (86%) had an out-of-pocket cost of $100 or less for their panel. There is a sizable population of women with a personal and/or family history of breast or ovarian cancer and negative BRCA1/2 test results who would qualify for updated multi-gene panel testing. In our study, 59% of those reached who were eligible completed a pre-test genetic counseling visit. Clinics could consider an outreach program to offer genetic counseling and updated genetic testing. Supports for this type of effort may include coordinators and genetic counseling assistants and an available database with patients' contact information and prior genetic test results. Updated testing allows women more information about their risk and may expand the value of genetic counseling.

Paraganglioma and other tumour detection rates in individuals with SDHx pathogenic variants by age of diagnosis and after the age of 50

OBJECTIVE

Patients with SDHx germline mutations (SDHA, AF2, B, C, D) are at risk for paragangliomas (PGLs), renal cell carcinoma and gastrointestinal stromal tumours. The aim of this study was to evaluate the age of SDHx tumour diagnosis in those with pathogenic variants (PVs), notably tumour detection after the age of 50 years.

STUDY DESIGN

Longitudinal retrospective observational analysis.

PATIENTS

Individuals with SDHx PVs.

MEASUREMENTS

Demographic, clinical, genetic, screening and tumour detection and treatment data were abstracted from the electronic medical record. Descriptive analysis was utilised.

RESULTS

A total of 165 patients with SDHx PVs from 34 families were evaluated. Sixty-eight patients (41.2%) had at least one known SDHx-related tumour in their history, identified through symptoms, screening or incidentally. The average age of SDHx-related tumour diagnosis was 32.0 years. Age of diagnosis varied by the gene. Nine patients (n = 50; 18.0%) were identified with a tumour after the age of 50, identified via baseline screening after PV identification, or due to symptoms before molecular SDHx diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Though tumours were identified in individuals above the age of 50; they were all identified on baseline screening or due to symptoms, confirming that baseline screening is essential. Given the slow-growing nature of PGLs, these tumours might have been discovered before age 50 if molecular diagnosis and baseline screening had occurred earlier. Considering discontinuing screening after age 50 may be warranted if baseline screen imaging is negative and the individual does not have a prior tumour history.

Comparing models of delivery for cancer genetics services among patients receiving primary care who meet criteria for genetic evaluation in two healthcare systems: BRIDGE randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Advances in genetics and sequencing technologies are enabling the identification of more individuals with inherited cancer susceptibility who could benefit from tailored screening and prevention recommendations. While cancer family history information is used in primary care settings to identify unaffected patients who could benefit from a cancer genetics evaluation, this information is underutilized. System-level population health management strategies are needed to assist health care systems in identifying patients who may benefit from genetic services. In addition, because of the limited number of trained genetics specialists and increasing patient volume, the development of innovative and sustainable approaches to delivering cancer genetic services is essential.

METHODS

We are conducting a randomized controlled trial, entitled Broadening the Reach, Impact, and Delivery of Genetic Services (BRIDGE), to address these needs. The trial is comparing uptake of genetic counseling, uptake of genetic testing, and patient adherence to management recommendations for automated, patient-directed versus enhanced standard of care cancer genetics services delivery models. An algorithm-based system that utilizes structured cancer family history data available in the electronic health record (EHR) is used to identify unaffected patients who receive primary care at the study sites and meet current guidelines for cancer genetic testing. We are enrolling eligible patients at two healthcare systems (University of Utah Health and New York University Langone Health) through outreach to a randomly selected sample of 2780 eligible patients in the two sites, with 1:1 randomization to the genetic services delivery arms within sites. Study outcomes are assessed through genetics clinic records, EHR, and two follow-up questionnaires at 4 weeks and 12 months after last genetic counseling contactpre-test genetic counseling.

DISCUSSION

BRIDGE is being conducted in two healthcare systems with different clinical structures and patient populations. Innovative aspects of the trial include a randomized comparison of a chatbot-based genetic services delivery model to standard of care, as well as identification of at-risk individuals through a sustainable EHR-based system. The findings from the BRIDGE trial will advance the state of the science in identification of unaffected patients with inherited cancer susceptibility and delivery of genetic services to those patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

BRIDGE is registered as NCT03985852 . The trial was registered on June 6, 2019 at clinicaltrials.gov .

RARE-24. IDENTIFYING INDIVIDUALS WITH PRIMARY CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM TUMORS AT RISK FOR HEREDITARY CANCER SYNDROMES USING THE UTAH POPULATION DATABASE

Background

CNS tumors are the most common solid tumors and the deadliest cancers in children. Approximately 10% of children with a CNS tumor harbor a hereditary cancer syndrome (HCS), but many will not be tested for a HCS. The Utah Population Database (UPDB) contains comprehensive cancer registry data for Utah families and can determine multigenerational cancer pedigrees across an archive of 5.8 million individuals. We hypothesize that the UPDB can identify children and families with HCSs not previously identified.

Methods

We queried the UPDB for individuals ages 0–39 diagnosed with a primary CNS tumor (malignant and benign) between 1966–2017 and generated cancer pedigrees of 3 generations or more for probands, extending to at least third-degree relatives. Specialized software calculated a familial standardized incidence ratio (FSIR) to determine families with excess clustering of CNS tumors. Clinical cancer genetics experts reviewed pedigrees to confirm patterns of HCS.

Results

We identified 4,634 CNS tumors in 4,550 individuals, of whom 2,233 (49%) reside in high-quality pedigrees containing ≥2 grandparents, at least 1 from both maternal and paternal sides. To identify families with excess clustering of CNS tumors, we selected pedigrees with an FSIR P<0.05 and ≥2 affected patients, resulting in 161 high-risk families with a mean of 170 (median 96) relatives per pedigree of 3–6 generations. Among these 161 families, there were 2,017 unique relatives (first-third degree) of CNS probands with 2,355 tumors (any site), for a per pedigree average of 14.7 tumors in 12.5 relatives. Review of the 10 highest risk pedigrees indicated that 4 meet HCS criteria, including Li-Fraumeni (n=2), von Hippel-Lindau (n=1), and rhabdoid tumor predisposition (n=1).

Conclusion

The UPDB can produce multigenerational cancer pedigrees that identify individuals and families at risk of harboring a HCS who warrant germline testing. These findings should encourage clinicians to perform thorough family history screening.

Use of the Utah population database to evaluate statewide use of genetic testing for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer

e22529

Background: Genetic testing for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer (HBOC) continues to be underutilized, and options for population-based assessment of testing barriers and outcomes are lacking. This project uses linkages between statewide data sources available through the Utah Population Database (UPDB) to establish an infrastructure for studying the use of HBOC cancer genetic testing across a state. Methods: Clinical HBOC testing data from 1994-2018 was obtained for the University of Utah Huntsman Cancer Institute, Intermountain Healthcare, Utah Cancer Specialists, and the Salt Lake Veterans administration via electronic imports of tests attributed to these healthcare systems from three commercial laboratories. Genetic testing was linked to external data through the UPDB to determine demographic and urban/rural designation. Cancer diagnoses were obtained from the Utah Cancer Registry, and genealogies from the Utah Resource for Genetic and Epidemiology Research. These variables were matched to data available for the individual at the date of testing. For individuals with multiple genetic tests, the date for the first test was used. Results: Testing data was available for 12983 individuals who linked to additional records within the UPDB. Tested individuals were 86% White, 9% Hispanic, and 16% lived in rural/frontier areas. 75% of tests were performed between 2011-2018. 1575 (12%) had >1 pathogenic variant (PVs) identified in an HBOC gene, with the majority of PVs being in BRCA1/2 (89%), and TP53, CHEK2, and ATM each accounting for 2% of PVs. 7178 cancers were diagnosed in 5980 individuals (46%, avg. 1.2 cancer/person). Cancer cases were evaluated to determine if National Comprehensive Cancer Network (HBOC 2018) criteria were met. Cancer cases who have a relative with BC < 50 years of age or a relative with ovarian cancer (OC) were more likely to have a have BRCA1/2 PV than cases not meeting those criteria (17.5% vs 6.1% and 22.3% vs. 6.3% respectively). Cancer cases meeting criteria due to family history of pancreatic cancer also had a higher rate of PVs (13.1% vs. 8.4%) predominately due to additional PVs in BRCA2. Conclusions: This project begins to address the challenge of population assessment of HBOC genetic testing. We established a regulatory infrastructure to share testing data between multiple healthcare systems. In collaboration with commercial laboratories, genetic testing data was obtained in a consistent, discrete format even though it is stored differently within each health care system. The majority (54%) of HBOC testing in Utah is happening in people who did not have cancer at the time of their test, and focusing on assessing testing of cancer patients will not provide comprehensive information on testing done in the state. Among individuals with cancer, access to family history information is crucial for assessing the rate of PVs and utility of testing criteria.

Identifying individuals with primary central nervous system tumors at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes using the Utah Population Database

10532

Background: CNS tumors are the most common solid tumors and the deadliest cancers in children. Approximately 10% of children with a CNS tumor harbor a hereditary cancer syndrome (HCS), but many will not be tested for a HCS. The Utah Population Database (UPDB) contains comprehensive cancer registry data for Utah families and can determine multigenerational cancer pedigrees across an archive of 5.8 million individuals. Early identification of HCSs results in improved cancer surveillance and outcomes, reducing the impact of CNS tumors in children. We hypothesize that the UPDB can identify children and families with HCSs not previously identified. Methods: We queried the UPDB for individuals ages 0-39 diagnosed with a primary CNS tumor (malignant and benign) between 1966-2017 and generated cancer pedigrees of 3 generations or more for probands, extending to at least third-degree relatives. Specialized software calculated a familial standardized incidence ratio (FSIR) to determine families with excess clustering of CNS tumors. Clinical cancer genetics experts reviewed pedigrees to confirm patterns of HCS. Results: We identified 4,634 CNS tumors in 4,550 individuals, of whom 2,233 (49%) reside in high-quality pedigrees containing ≥2 grandparents, at least 1 from both maternal and paternal sides. To identify families with excess clustering of CNS tumors, we selected pedigrees with an FSIR P< 0.05 and ≥2 affected patients, resulting in 161 high-risk families with a mean of 170 (median 96) relatives per pedigree of 3-6 generations. Among these 161 families, there were 2,017 unique relatives (first-third degree) of CNS probands with 2,355 tumors (any site), for a per pedigree average of 14.7 tumors in 12.5 relatives. Review of the 10 highest risk pedigrees indicated that 4 meet HCS criteria, including Li-Fraumeni (n = 2), von Hippel-Lindau (n = 1), and rhabdoid tumor predisposition (n = 1). Conclusions: The UPDB can produce multigenerational cancer pedigrees that identify individuals and families at risk of harboring a HCS who warrant germline testing. These findings should encourage clinicians to perform thorough family history screening and to always consider workup for associated HCSs.

Description of a SDHD c.129G&gt;A (p.W43X) Mutation With Variable Presentation in Multiple Family Members

Approximately 40% of paragangliomas and pheochromocytomas are attributed to hereditary mutations. SDHD mutations account for 7% of inherited mutations (PGL1 syndrome), is maternally imprinted and has variable penetrance. SDHD pathogenic variants (PV) have been previously described extensively in Dutch pedigrees, with a varying lifetime risk for tumor development. Here we report a large family (Fig 1) displaying a SDHD c.129G&gt;A (p.W43X) variation in 12 family members, 10 of whom had screening or tumor history available. The presentation and age of diagnosis in family members showed variable penetrance. Age at first diagnosis of a pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma ranged from 10 - 45 years. Family members displayed bilateral pheochromocytomas, bilateral carotid body tumors, and paragangliomas of the head, neck and trunk with variable recurrence rates (none to multiple). No malignant lesions were detected to date. Pheochromocytomas were norepinephrine producing. Paragangliomas ranged from non-functional to dopamine and norepinephrine producing. Compared to previous reports of other SDHD mutations, the SDHD c.129G&gt;A (p.W43X) variation displayed an earlier age at first diagnosis with a highly variable phenotype ranging from one benign, non-secreting paraganglioma to bilateral pheochromocytomas and recurrent parganagliomas along the parasympathetic chain from head to abdomen. This report contributes to the evolving understanding of the phenotypic presentations of various genetic mutations. We propose that expert guidelines that suggest screening family members with the SDHD c.129G&gt;A (p.W43X) variation at the age of 8 for early detection of pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas is beneficial.

Priority of Risk (But Not Perceived Magnitude of Risk) Predicts Improved Sun-Protection Behavior Following Genetic Counseling for Familial Melanoma

BACKGROUND

Understanding multiple components of risk perceptions is important because perceived risk predicts engagement in prevention behaviors.

PURPOSE

To examine how multiple components of risk perceptions (perceived magnitude of and worry about risk, prioritization of the management of one's risk) changed following genetic counseling with or without test reporting, and to examine which of these components prospectively predicted improvements in sun-protection behavior 1 year later.

METHODS

A prospective, nonrandomized study design was used. Participants were 114 unaffected members of melanoma-prone families who (i) underwent genetic testing for a CDKN2A/p16 mutation (n = 69) or (ii) were at comparably elevated risk based on family history and underwent genetic counseling but not testing (no-test controls, n = 45). Participants reported risk perception components and sun-protection behavior at baseline, immediately following counseling, and 1 month and 1 year after counseling.

RESULTS

Factor analysis indicated three risk components. Carriers reported increased perceived magnitude and priority of risk, but not cancer worry. No-test controls showed no changes in any risk perception. Among noncarriers, priority of risk remained high at all assessments, whereas magnitude of risk and cancer worry decreased. Of the three risk components, greater priority of risk uniquely predicted improved self-reported sun protection 1 year post-counseling.

CONCLUSIONS

Priority of risk (i) seems to be a component of risk perceptions distinguishable from magnitude of risk and cancer worry, (ii) may be an important predictor of daily prevention behavior, and (iii) remained elevated 1 year following genetic counseling only for participants who received a positive melanoma genetic test result.

Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic focus primarily on assessment of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants associated with increased risk of breast, ovarian, and pancreatic cancer and recommended approaches to genetic testing/counseling and management strategies in individuals with these pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants. This manuscript focuses on cancer risk and risk management for BRCA-related breast/ovarian cancer syndrome and Li-Fraumeni syndrome. Carriers of a BRCA1/2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant have an excessive risk for both breast and ovarian cancer that warrants consideration of more intensive screening and preventive strategies. There is also evidence that risks of prostate cancer and pancreatic cancer are elevated in these carriers. Li-Fraumeni syndrome is a highly penetrant cancer syndrome associated with a high lifetime risk for cancer, including soft tissue sarcomas, osteosarcomas, premenopausal breast cancer, colon cancer, gastric cancer, adrenocortical carcinoma, and brain tumors.

Radiation therapy and secondary malignancy in Li-Fraumeni syndrome: A hereditary cancer registry study

Background

Li‐Fraumeni Syndrome (LFS) is a rare cancer‐predisposing condition caused by germline mutations in TP53. Conventional wisdom and prior work has implied an increased risk of secondary malignancy in LFS patients treated with radiation therapy (RT); however, this risk is not well‐characterized. Here we describe the risk of subsequent malignancy and cancer‐related death in LFS patients after undergoing RT for a first or second primary cancer.

Methods

We reviewed a multi‐institutional hereditary cancer registry of patients with germline TP53 mutations who were treated from 2004 to 2017. We assessed the rate of subsequent malignancy and death in the patients who received RT (RT group) as part of their cancer treatment compared to those who did not (non‐RT group).

Results

Forty patients with LFS were identified and 14 received RT with curative intent as part of their cancer treatment. The median time to follow‐up after RT was 4.5 years. Fifty percent (7/14) of patients in the curative‐intent group developed a subsequent malignancy (median time 3.5 years) compared to 46% of patients in the non‐RT group (median time 5.0 years). Four of seven subsequent malignancies occurred within a prior radiation field and all shared histology with the primary cancer suggesting recurrence rather than new malignancy.

Conclusion

We found that four of14 patients treated with RT developed in‐field malignancies. All had the same histology as the primary suggesting local recurrences rather than RT‐induced malignancies. We recommend that RT should be considered as part of the treatment algorithm when clinically indicated and after multidisciplinary discussion.

Characterization of Malignant Head and Neck Paragangliomas at a Single Institution Across Multiple Decades

Importance

Malignant head and neck paragangliomas (HNPGLs) are rare entities, and there are limited data regarding optimal treatment recommendations to improve clinical outcomes.

Objective

To classify succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) germline mutations associated with malignant HNPGLs, evaluate time from diagnosis to identification of malignant tumor, describe locations of metastases and the functional status of malignant HNPGLs, and determine the role of selective neck dissection at the time of initial surgical resection.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cohort study was completed of patients diagnosed with paragangliomas on various sites on the body at an academic tertiary cancer hospital between the years 1963 and 2018. A subanalysis of HNPGLs was also completed. Data regarding diagnosis, gene and mutation, tumor characteristics and location, and treatments used were reviewed between February 2017 and March 2018.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Mutations of SDH genes associated with benign and malignant HNPGLs, treatments used, time to the discovery of malignancy, and location of metastasis.

Results

Of the 70 patients included in the study, 40 (57%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 47 (21.1) years. Of patients with tumors isolated to the head and neck, 38 (54%) had benign HNPGLs, which were associated with mutations in the genes SDH subunit B (SDHB) (n = 18; 47%), SDH subunit C (n = 2; 5%), and SDH subunit D (n = 18; 47%). Among those with malignant HNPGLs, all but 1 patient had mutations in SDHB (n = 5; 83%); 1 patient had no mutation associated with their disease. The average age at diagnosis for malignant HNPGLs was 35 years, while benign tumors were diagnosed at an average age at 36 years. All patients with malignant disease underwent surgery. Four patients were found to have metastasis at the time of selective neck dissection. Among patients with malignant HNPGLs, 5 (83%) were treated with adjuvant radiation, and 1 (17%) was treated with adjuvant chemotherapy.

Conclusions and Relevance

Malignant HNPGLs are rare entities that are difficult to diagnose and are typically identified by the presence of regional or distant metastasis. The results of this study found the prevalence of malignant HNPGLs to be 9%. These data suggest that it is beneficial to perform a selective neck dissection at the time of tumor excision. All patients with malignant HNPGLs but 1 had SDHB mutations.

Tumor detection rates in screening carriers with SDHx-related hereditary paraganglioma-pheochromocytoma syndrome based on prior tumor history

1545

Background: Patients with germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in the SDHx genes have increased risk for paragangliomas/pheochromocytomas (PGL/PCC), renal cell carcinomas, and gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Expert recommendation suggests individuals with SDHx PVs undergo biennial whole-body imaging and annual biochemical testing. This study aimed to evaluate tumor detection rate using standard biochemical and imaging protocols for individuals with SDHx PVs, particularly in those with and without SDHx-related tumor history, and in those with biochemical testing data. Methods: A retrospective longitudinal observational study at the Universities of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Utah Huntsman Cancer Institute was conducted from the start of each center’s screening program through March 1, 2018. Individuals with SDHx PVs had clinical imaging with whole body MRI/CT and biochemical testing per expert recommendation. SDHx-related tumors identified during clinical screening were measured. Results: A total of 263 individuals with SDHx PVs completed 491 screens. Individuals with SDHB PVs were the most prevalent (n = 188, 71.5%). The average number of screens per subject was 1.87 (range 1-7). A majority (n = 194, 73.7%) of individuals did not have a prior history of PGL/PCC. Overall, SDHx-related tumors were detected in 17.1% (n = 45) of the cohort. Of the 46 scans that identified an SDHx-related tumor, 85% of them (n = 39) were baseline scans. SDHx-related tumors were identified in 18.6% (n = 36/194) of individuals that did not have a prior history of PGL/PCC, whereas they were identified in 13.0% (n = 9/69) of individuals that did have a prior history of PGL/PCC (p = 0.39). Biochemical testing was available for 70% (n = 343) of imaging screens, of which 18% (n = 61) had positive biochemistry. Of those with positive biochemistry, 19 tumors were identified on imaging (6%). Sixteen tumors were identified on imaging with negative biochemistry (5%) with a sensitivity of 54% and a specificity of 94%. Utilizing a cut-off of two times the upper limit of normal, 9.91% (n = 34) biochemical tests were positive, and 15 (44.12%) had an SDHx-related tumor on corresponding imaging. Conclusions: Current SDHx screening protocols are effective at identifying SDHx-related tumors. Tumors were detected in subjects with a prior history of PGL/PCC and those with no prior history. This suggests life-long screening is important for all SDHx carriers. Imaging is a crucial piece of SDHx screening given biochemical testing’s sensitivity and specificity.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic, Version 1.2020

The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic provide recommendations for genetic testing and counseling for hereditary cancer syndromes, and risk management recommendations for patients who are diagnosed with syndromes associated with an increased risk of these cancers. The NCCN panel meets at least annually to review comments, examine relevant new data, and reevaluate and update recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's discussion and most recent recommendations regarding criteria for high-penetrance genes associated with breast and ovarian cancer beyond BRCA1/2, pancreas screening and genes associated with pancreatic cancer, genetic testing for the purpose of systemic therapy decision-making, and testing for people with Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry.

Pathogenic Germline DNA Repair Gene and HOXB13 Mutations in Men With Metastatic Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Germline mutations in DNA repair (DR) genes and susceptibility genes CDKN2A and HOXB13 have previously been associated with prostate cancer (PC) incidence and/or progression. However, the role and prevalence of this class of mutations in metastatic PC (mPC) are not fully understood.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

To evaluate the frequency of pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline variants (PVs/LPVs) in men with mPC, this study sequenced 38 DR genes, CDKN2A, and HOXB13 in a predominantly white cohort of 317 patients with mPC. A PC registry at the University of Utah was used for patient sample acquisition and retrospective clinical data collection. Deep target sequencing allowed for germline and copy number variant analyses. Validated PVs/LPVs were integrated with clinical and demographic data for statistical correlation analyses.

RESULTS

All pathogenic variants were found in men self-reported as white, with a carrier frequency of 8.5% (DR genes, 7.3%; CDKN2A/HOXB13, 1.2%). Consistent with previous reports, mutations were most frequently identified in the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA2. It was also found that 50% of identified PVs/LPVs were categorized as founder mutations with European origins. Correlation analyses did not support a trend toward more advanced or earlier-onset disease in comparisons between carriers and noncarriers of deleterious DR or HOXB13 G84E mutations.

CONCLUSION

These findings demonstrate a lower prevalence of germline PVs/LPVs in an unselected, predominantly white mPC cohort than previously reported, which may have implications for the design of clinical trials testing targeted therapies. Larger studies in broad and diverse populations are needed to more accurately define the prevalence of germline mutations in men with mPC.

Case series examining somatic test results for patients with hereditary cancer syndromes associated with gastrointestinal cancer risk

680

Background: Somatic tumor testing may identify germline pathogenic variants (PV) associated with cancer predisposition syndromes. Labs differ whether they offer somatic only or paired germline analysis. Methods used by somatic testing labs, even those that include germline analysis, differ from designated germline labs that have optimized the identification of germline PV. Methods: Chart reviews were performed for patients who had testing through both somatic and designated germline laboratories. Cases with discrepant results in which germline PV were not detected by the somatic laboratory are summarized. Results: Nine cases with discrepant results. Five had paired germline testing and 4 somatic testing only. All 9 patients met the criteria to undergo designated germline testing, either for Lynch syndrome (3) or BRCA1/2 testing (6), based on personal and/or family history. Designated germline testing identified 4 MLH1, 1 BRCA1, 2 ATM, 1 MUTYH and 1 RAD50 PV not reported by the somatic labs’ tumor or germline analysis; 2 MLH1 PV were called variants of uncertain significance by somatic testing but classified as PV by ClinVar and designated germline labs. Three PV identified by designated germline labs are targets for PARP inhibitors and resulted in different treatment options. Three of the MLH1 PV were identified in patients meeting Lynch Syndrome test criteria while 1 was identified in a patient meeting BRCA1/2 criteria. Among the 5 other patients meeting BRCA1/2 test criteria, 3 had PV in breast cancer genes (2 ATM, 1 BRCA1) and 2 had PV in other cancer genes ( MUTYH and RAD50) not reported by the somatic labs, highlighting the importance of panel testing. Conclusions: Methods used by somatic labs, regardless of inclusion of germline analysis, are not equivalent to those of designated germline labs. Overlooked germline PV may miss identification of hereditary syndromes and targeted therapy opportunities (e.g. Anti-PD1 immunotherapy, PARP inhibitors). Patients meeting criteria for genetic evaluation should be referred for designated germline testing regardless of somatic testing outcomes.

Standards-Based Clinical Decision Support Platform to Manage Patients Who Meet Guideline-Based Criteria for Genetic Evaluation of Familial Cancer

PURPOSE

The ubiquitous adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) with family health history (FHH) data provides opportunities for tailoring cancer screening strategies to individuals. We aimed to enable a standards-based clinical decision support (CDS) platform for identifying and managing patients who meet guidelines for genetic evaluation of hereditary cancer.

METHODS

The CDS platform (www.opencds.org) was used to implement algorithms based on the 2018 National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for genetic evaluation of hereditary breast/ovarian and colorectal cancer. The platform was designed to be interfaced with different EHR systems via the Health Level Seven International Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources standard. The platform was integrated with the Epic EHR and evaluated in a pilot study at an academic health care system.

RESULTS

The CDS platform was executed against a target population of 143,012 patients; 5,245 (3.7%) met criteria for genetic evaluation based on the FHH recorded in the EHR. In a clinical pilot study, genetic counselors attempted to reach out to 71 of the patients. Of those patients, 25 (35%) scheduled an appointment, 10 (14%) declined, 2 (3%) did not need genetic counseling, 7 (10%) said they would consider it in the future, and 27 (38%) were unreachable. To date, 13 (52%) of the scheduled patients completed visits, and 2 (15%) of those were found to have pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes.

CONCLUSION

A standards-based CDS platform integrated with EHR systems is a promising population-based approach to identify patients who are appropriate candidates for genetic evaluation of hereditary cancers.

A pilot study of a telehealth family-focused melanoma preventive intervention for children with a family history of melanoma

OBJECTIVE

Melanoma preventive interventions for children with familial risk are critically needed because ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure and sunburn occurrence early in life are the primary modifiable risk factors for melanoma. The current study examined the feasibility and acceptability of a new, family-focused telehealth intervention for children with familial risk for melanoma and their parents. The study also explored changes in child sun protection and risk behaviors, sunburn occurrence, and objectively measured UVR exposure.

METHODS

This was a prospective study with a single-group design (n = 21 parent-child dyads, children ages 8-17). Dyads were asked to participate in three in-person assessments and three live video teleconference intervention sessions.

RESULTS

The intervention was feasibly delivered, and the intervention content was acceptable to parents and children. The intervention was associated with improvements in child use of certain sun protection strategies over time and declines in child UVR exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

A telehealth-delivered,family-focused melanoma preventive intervention was feasibly delivered and was acceptable to parent-child dyads. Future melanoma preventive interventions for this at-risk population could incorporate eHealth technologies to facilitate improvements in use of sun protection and monitoring of UVR exposure. This trial was registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT02846714.

Barriers and Facilitators to Melanoma Prevention and Control Behaviors Among At-Risk Children

Melanoma prevention is essential for children who are at elevated risk for the disease due to family history. However, children who carry a familial risk for the disease do not optimally adhere to recommended melanoma preventive behaviors. The current study sought to identify perceived barriers to and facilitators of children's engagement in melanoma preventive behaviors among children at elevated risk for melanoma due to family history of the disease (i.e., having a parent with a history of melanoma) from both parents' and childrens' perspectives. Qualitative methods were employed and consisted of separate focus group discussions with children (ages 8-17 years, n = 37) and their parents (n = 39). Focus group transcripts were coded using content analysis. Parents and children reported a number of barriers and facilitators, including on the individual (e.g., knowledge and awareness, preferences), social (e.g., peer influences, family modeling and communication), and contextual (e.g., healthcare provider communication) levels. The identified categories of barriers and facilitators both confirm and extend the literature documenting the reasons children who are at elevated risk for melanoma do not engage in melanoma prevention and control behaviors. Programs aiming to decrease melanoma risk among children of melanoma survivors could help families address their barriers to preventive behavior implementation and build on facilitators. Melanoma survivors and their children could benefit from support on their interactions with healthcare providers, schools, peers, and other caregivers about melanoma prevention.

Population prevalence of individuals meeting criteria for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer testing

Background

Personal cancer diagnosis and family cancer history factor into which individuals should undergo genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome. Family history is often determined in the research setting through kindreds with disease clusters, or clinically from self‐report. The population prevalence of individuals with diagnostic characteristics and/or family cancer history meeting criteria for HBOC testing is unknown.

Methods

Utilizing Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry data and a research resource linking registry records to genealogies, the Utah Population Database, the population‐based prevalence of diagnostic and family history characteristics meeting National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for HBOC testing was objectively assessed.

Results

Among Utah residents with an incident breast cancer diagnosis 2010‐2015 and evaluable for family history, 21.6% met criteria for testing based on diagnostic characteristics, but the proportion increased to 62.9% when family history was evaluated. The proportion of cases meeting testing criteria at diagnosis was 94% for ovarian cancer, 23% for prostate cancer, and 51.1% for pancreatic cancer. Among an unaffected Utah population of approximately 1.7 million evaluable for family history, 197,601 or 11.6% met testing criteria based on family history.

Conclusions

This study quantifies the population‐based prevalence of HBOC criteria using objectively determined genealogy and cancer incidence data. Sporadic breast cancer likely represents a portion of the high prevalence of family cancer history seen in this study. These results underline the importance of establishing presence of a deleterious mutation in an affected family member, per NCCN guidelines, before testing unaffected relatives.

Familial Cancer Clustering in Urothelial Cancer: A Population-Based Case-Control Study

Background

Family history of bladder cancer confers an increased risk for concordant and discordant cancers in relatives. However, previous studies investigating this relationship lack any correction for smoking status of family members. We conducted a population-based study of cancer risks in relatives of bladder cancer patients and matched controls with exclusion of variant subtypes to improve the understanding of familial cancer clustering.

Methods

Case subjects with urothelial carcinoma were identified using the Utah Cancer Registry and matched 1:5 to cancer-free controls from the Utah Population Database. Cox regression was used to determine the risk of cancer in first-degree relatives, second-degree relatives, first cousins, and spouses. A total of 229 251 relatives of case subjects and 1 197 552 relatives of matched control subjects were analyzed. To correct for smoking status, we performed a secondary analysis excluding families with elevated rates of smoking-related cancers. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results

First- and second-degree relatives of case subjects had an increased risk for any cancer diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03 to 1.09, P < .001; HR = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.02 to 1.07, P = .001) and urothelial cancer (HR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.50 to 1.99, P < .001; HR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.21 to 1.51, P < .001). Site-specific analysis found increased risk for bladder (HR = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.47 to 1.95, P < .001), kidney (HR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.08 to 1.57, P = .006), cervical (HR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.49, P = .01), and lung cancer (HR = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.19 to 1.51, P < .001) in first-degree relatives. Second-degree relatives had increased risk for bladder (HR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.2 to 1.5, P < .001) and thyroid cancer (HR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.35, P = .02). Spouses showed an increased risk for laryngeal (HR = 2.68, 95% CI = 1.02 to 7.05, P = .04) and cervical cancer (HR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.13 to 2.17, P = .007). These results did not substantively change after correction for suspected smoking behaviors.

Conclusion

Our results suggest familial urothelial cancer clustering independent of smoking, with increased risk in relatives for both concordant and discordant cancers, suggesting shared genetic or environmental roots. Identifying families with statistically significant risks for non-smoking-related urothelial cancer would be extremely informative for genetic linkage studies.

Gliomas in the context of Li-Fraumeni syndrome: An international cohort

1517

Background: Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is a cancer predisposition syndrome associated with germline mutation in the TP53 tumor suppressor gene. As a result of increased awareness and surveillance imaging, more asymptomatic low-grade brain lesions are being identified, raising important questions regarding the management of those patients. Sporadic low-grade gliomas (LGG) in the pediatric age rarely transform to malignant lesions, whereas the prognosis of high-grade gliomas (HGG) is grim in all age groups. Although HGG is a hallmark of LFS, little is known of the natural history of these lesions in this syndrome. Methods: For this multi-institutional retrospective study, anonymized clinicopathologic data from TP53 mutation carriers with gliomas were collected and analysed. Results: Our cohort included 61 patients, of whom 71% (n = 45) were children or young adults (age < 25 years). 39% of patients with known family history of cancer had a close relative with a brain tumor. Of 31 patients with low grade lesions at presentation, 83% (n = 26) were identified through surveillance. Five-year progression free survival (PFS) for these patients was 48%, though two patients progressed later. Furthermore, at 5 years 25% of these patients had biopsy proven malignant transformation to HGG. This “transformation free survival” rate did not plateau, as at 7 years 56% of patients transformed. When considering death from a brain tumor, the 5- and 10- year overall survival (OS) for the LGG group was 100% and 83%, respectively. Additional 3 patients succumbed to other LFS related malignancies. For the HGG group, consisting of 30 patients, the 5 year OS was 35% (median follow-up 19.5 months), comparing favorably with the sporadic HGG population as reported in the literature. Almost all of these patients presented with clinical symptoms. Notably, 12 (40%) of them had a prior malignancy. Conclusions: Our analysis suggests that the risk of transformation of LGG in the setting of LFS is high and warrants ongoing surveillance. Interestingly, there are a considerable number of long- term survivors in our HGG group, although the median follow up is still short. Further study to examine potential genotype- phenotype correlations in germline TP53 mutation carriers will inform strategies to identify those patients at highest risk of glioma progression.