Randomised trial of population-based BRCA testing in Ashkenazi Jews: long-term secondary lifestyle behavioural outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Ashkenazi-Jewish (AJ) population-based BRCA testing is acceptable, cost-effective and amplifies primary prevention for breast & ovarian cancer. However, data describing lifestyle impact are lacking. We report long-term results of population-based BRCA testing on lifestyle behaviour and cancer risk perception.

DESIGN

Two-arm randomised controlled trials (ISRCTN73338115, GCaPPS): (a) population-screening (PS); (b) family history (FH)/clinical criteria testing.

SETTING

North London AJ-population.

POPULATION/SAMPLE

AJ women/men >18 years.

EXCLUSIONS

prior BRCA testing or first-degree relatives of BRCA-carriers.

METHODS

Participants were recruited through self-referral. All participants received informed pre-test genetic counselling. The intervention included genetic testing for three AJ BRCA-mutations: 185delAG(c.68_69delAG), 5382insC(c.5266dupC) and 6174delT(c.5946delT). This was undertaken for all participants in the PS arm and participants fulfilling FH/clinical criteria in the FH arm. Patients filled out customised/validated questionnaires at baseline/1-year/2-year/3-year follow-ups. Generalised linear-mixed models adjusted for covariates and appropriate contrast tests were used for between-group/within-group analysis of lifestyle and behavioural outcomes along with evaluating factors associated with these outcomes. Outcomes are adjusted for multiple testing (Bonferroni method), with P < 0.0039 considered significant.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Lifestyle/behavioural outcomes at baseline/1-year/2-year/3-year follow-ups.

RESULTS

1034 participants were randomised to PS (n = 530) or FH (n = 504) arms. No significant difference was identified between PS- and FH-based BRCA testing approaches in terms of dietary fruit/vegetable/meat consumption, vitamin intake, alcohol quantity/ frequency, smoking behaviour (frequency/cessation), physical activity/exercise or routine breast mammogram screening behaviour, with outcomes not affected by BRCA test result. Cancer risk perception decreased with time following BRCA testing, with no difference between FH/PS approaches, and the perception of risk was lowest in BRCA-negative participants. Men consumed fewer fruits/vegetables/vitamins and more meat/alcohol than women (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Population-based and FH-based AJ BRCA testing have similar long-term lifestyle impacts on smoking, alcohol, dietary fruit/vegetable/meat/vitamin, exercise, breast screening participation and reduced cancer risk perception.

Unselected Population Genetic Testing for Personalised Ovarian Cancer Risk Prediction: A Qualitative Study Using Semi-Structured Interviews

Unselected population-based personalised ovarian cancer (OC) risk assessments combining genetic, epidemiological and hormonal data have not previously been undertaken. We aimed to understand the attitudes, experiences and impact on the emotional well-being of women from the general population who underwent unselected population genetic testing (PGT) for personalised OC risk prediction and who received low-risk (<5% lifetime risk) results. This qualitative study was set within recruitment to a pilot PGT study using an OC risk tool and telephone helpline. OC-unaffected women ≥ 18 years and with no prior OC gene testing were ascertained through primary care in London. In-depth, semi-structured and 1:1 interviews were conducted until informational saturation was reached following nine interviews. Six interconnected themes emerged: health beliefs; decision making; factors influencing acceptability; effect on well-being; results communication; satisfaction. Satisfaction with testing was high and none expressed regret. All felt the telephone helpline was helpful and should remain optional. Delivery of low-risk results reduced anxiety. However, care must be taken to emphasise that low risk does not equal no risk. The main facilitators were ease of testing, learning about children’s risk and a desire to prevent disease. Barriers included change in family dynamics, insurance, stigmatisation and personality traits associated with stress/worry. PGT for personalised OC risk prediction in women in the general population had high acceptability/satisfaction and reduced anxiety in low-risk individuals. Facilitators/barriers observed were similar to those reported with genetic testing from high-risk cancer clinics and unselected PGT in the Jewish population.

Characteristics and experiences of patients from a community-based and consumer-directed hereditary cancer population screening initiative

A clinical hereditary cancer population screening initiative, called Information is Power, began in North Alabama in 2015. After 4 years of the initiative, we were interested in exploring (1) the characteristics and motivations for patients who self-refer to population genetic testing, (2) how patients make decisions on testing, (3) what patients do with results, and (4) patient perceptions of benefits and limitations after undergoing population genetic testing. Patients who consented to research recontact at time of test ordering were sent an electronic survey with the option for a follow-up phone interview. Among the 2,918 eligible patients, 239 responded to the survey and 19 completed an interview. Survey and interview participants were highly educated information seekers motivated by learning more about their health. Those who were previously interested in hereditary cancer testing reported barriers were cost and insurance coverage, access to testing, and uncertainty how results could impact their health. Many participants (77%) communicated with family and friends about their decision to test and communicated about test results. Fewer participants (23%) discussed the decision to test with their healthcare providers; however, 58% of participants discussed their test results with a healthcare provider. Most people (96%) with negative results accurately recalled their results. In contrast, three out of 11 positive results for heterozygous MUTYH, PALB2, and BRCA2 reported receiving negative results. This study contributes to knowledge on population genetic testing and may guide other population genetic testing programs as they develop enrollment materials and educational materials and consider downstream needs of population genetic testing participants.

Barriers and Facilitators for Population Genetic Screening in Healthy Populations: A Systematic Review

Studies suggest that 1-3% of the general population in the United States unknowingly carry a genetic risk factor for a common hereditary disease. Population genetic screening is the process of offering otherwise healthy patients in the general population testing for genomic variants that predispose them to diseases that are clinically actionable, meaning that they can be prevented or mitigated if they are detected early. Population genetic screening may significantly reduce morbidity and mortality from these diseases by informing risk-specific prevention or treatment strategies and facilitating appropriate participation in early detection. To better understand current barriers, facilitators, perceptions, and outcomes related to the implementation of population genetic screening, we conducted a systematic review and searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for articles published from date of database inception to May 2020. We included articles that 1) detailed the perspectives of participants in population genetic screening programs and 2) described the barriers, facilitators, perceptions, and outcomes related to population genetic screening programs among patients, healthcare providers, and the public. We excluded articles that 1) focused on direct-to-consumer or risk-based genetic testing and 2) were published before January 2000. Thirty articles met these criteria. Barriers and facilitators to population genetic screening were organized by the Social Ecological Model and further categorized by themes. We found that research in population genetic screening has focused on stakeholder attitudes with all included studies designed to elucidate individuals' perceptions. Additionally, inadequate knowledge and perceived limited clinical utility presented a barrier for healthcare provider uptake. There were very few studies that conducted long-term follow-up and evaluation of population genetic screening. Our findings suggest that these and other factors, such as prescreen counseling and education, may play a role in the adoption and implementation of population genetic screening. Future studies to investigate macro-level determinants, strategies to increase provider buy-in and knowledge, delivery models for prescreen counseling, and long-term outcomes of population genetic screening are needed for the effective design and implementation of such programs. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020198198.

Weekly population testing could stop this pandemic and prevent the next

The rapid spread of the SARS-COV-2 delta variant in the UK despite high vaccination coverage will inevitably accelerate when social restrictions end unless testing and contact tracing become much more effective. To minimize further social and economic damage, the effect on R of introducing weekly population testing as social restrictions are relaxed should be evaluated. The large increase in testing capacity required can be achieved with self-taken saliva samples analysed by RT-LAMP in local testing facilities. The costs and effectiveness can be evaluated in whole-city demonstration studies. A local population register in each city or district is essential to issue weekly invitations, manage sample collection, monitor results and achieve rapid notification of households and other contacts when a test is positive. In the UK, weekly test invitations should be managed, like vaccination invitations, by the NHS, with social and financial support for quarantined households to make self-isolation acceptable. A framework for effective population testing that had been established and evaluated during this pandemic could be rapidly reinstated to suppress the next pandemic while vaccines for a new and perhaps more deadly virus are developed and rolled out.

Economic Evaluation of Population-Based BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutation Testing across Multiple Countries and Health Systems

Clinical criteria/Family history-based BRCA testing misses a large proportion of BRCA carriers who can benefit from screening/prevention. We estimate the cost-effectiveness of population-based BRCA testing in general population women across different countries/health systems. A Markov model comparing the lifetime costs and effects of BRCA1/BRCA2 testing all general population women ≥30 years compared with clinical criteria/FH-based testing. Separate analyses are undertaken for the UK/USA/Netherlands (high-income countries/HIC), China/Brazil (upper–middle income countries/UMIC) and India (low–middle income countries/LMIC) using both health system/payer and societal perspectives. BRCA carriers undergo appropriate screening/prevention interventions to reduce breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) risk. Outcomes include OC, BC, and additional heart disease deaths and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Probabilistic/one-way sensitivity analyses evaluate model uncertainty. For the base case, from a societal perspective, we found that population-based BRCA testing is cost-saving in HIC (UK-ICER = $−5639/QALY; USA-ICER = $−4018/QALY; Netherlands-ICER = $−11,433/QALY), and it appears cost-effective in UMIC (China-ICER = $18,066/QALY; Brazil-ICER = $13,579/QALY), but it is not cost-effective in LMIC (India-ICER = $23,031/QALY). From a payer perspective, population-based BRCA testing is highly cost-effective in HIC (UK-ICER = $21,191/QALY, USA-ICER = $16,552/QALY, Netherlands-ICER = $25,215/QALY), and it is cost-effective in UMIC (China-ICER = $23,485/QALY, Brazil−ICER = $20,995/QALY), but it is not cost-effective in LMIC (India-ICER = $32,217/QALY). BRCA testing costs below $172/test (ICER = $19,685/QALY), which makes it cost-effective (from a societal perspective) for LMIC/India. Population-based BRCA testing can prevent an additional 2319 to 2666 BC and 327 to 449 OC cases per million women than the current clinical strategy. Findings suggest that population-based BRCA testing for countries evaluated is extremely cost-effective across HIC/UMIC health systems, is cost-saving for HIC health systems from a societal perspective, and can prevent tens of thousands more BC/OC cases.

Population Based Testing for Primary Prevention: A Systematic Review

The current clinical model for genetic testing is based on clinical-criteria/family-history (FH) and a pre-defined mutation probability threshold. It requires people to develop cancer before identifying unaffected individuals in the family to target prevention. This process is inefficient, resource intensive and misses >50% of individuals or mutation carriers at risk. Population genetic-testing can overcome these limitations. It is technically feasible to test populations on a large scale; genetic-testing costs are falling and acceptability and awareness are rising. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Pubmed, CINAHL and PsychINFO databases were searched using free-text and MeSH terms; retrieved reference lists of publications were screened; additionally, web-based platforms, Google, and clinical-trial registries were searched. Quality of studies was evaluated using appropriate check-lists. A number of studies have evaluated population-based BRCA-testing in the Jewish population. This has been found to be acceptable, feasible, clinically-effective, safe, associated with high satisfaction rates and extremely cost-effective. Data support change in guidelines for population-based BRCA-testing in the Jewish population. Population panel testing for BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 gene mutations is the most cost-effective genetic-testing strategy in general-population women and can prevent thousands more breast and ovarian cancers than current clinical-criteria based approaches. A few ongoing studies are evaluating population-based genetic-testing for multiple cancer susceptibility genes in the general population but more implementation studies are needed. A future population-testing programme could also target other chronic diseases.

Cost effectiveness of population based BRCA1 founder mutation testing in Sephardi Jewish women

BACKGROUND

Population-based BRCA1/BRCA2 founder-mutation testing has been demonstrated as cost effective compared with family history based testing in Ashkenazi Jewish women. However, only 1 of the 3 Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA1/BRCA2 founder mutations (185delAG[c.68_69delAG]), 5382insC[c.5266dupC]), and 6174delT[c.5946delT]) is found in the Sephardi Jewish population (185delAG[c.68_69delAG]), and the overall prevalence of BRCA mutations in the Sephardi Jewish population is accordingly lower (0.7% compared with 2.5% in the Ashkenazi Jewish population). Cost-effectiveness analyses of BRCA testing have not previously been performed at these lower BRCA prevalence levels seen in the Sephardi Jewish population. Here we present a cost-effectiveness analysis for UK and US populations comparing population testing with clinical criteria/family history-based testing in Sephardi Jewish women.

STUDY DESIGN

A Markov model was built comparing the lifetime costs and effects of population-based BRCA1 testing, with testing using family history-based clinical criteria in Sephardi Jewish women aged ≥30 years. BRCA1 carriers identified were offered magnetic resonance imaging/mammograms and risk-reducing surgery. Costs are reported at 2015 prices. Outcomes include breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and excess deaths from heart disease. All costs and outcomes are discounted at 3.5%. The time horizon is lifetime, and perspective is payer. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-year was calculated. Parameter uncertainty was evaluated through 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Population testing resulted in gain in life expectancy of 12 months (quality-adjusted life-year = 1.00). The baseline discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for UK population-based testing was £67.04/quality-adjusted life-year and for US population was $308.42/quality-adjusted life-year. Results were robust in the 1-way sensitivity analysis. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed 100% of simulations were cost effective at £20,000/quality-adjusted life-year UK and the $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year US willingness-to-pay thresholds. Scenario analysis showed that population testing remains cost effective in UK and US populations, even if premenopausal oophorectomy does not reduce breast cancer risk or if hormone replacement therapy compliance is nil.

CONCLUSION

Population-based BRCA1 testing is highly cost effective compared with clinical criteria-driven approach in Sephardi Jewish women. This supports changing the paradigm to population-based BRCA testing in the Jewish population, regardless of Ashkenazi/Sephardi ancestry.

Cost-effectiveness of population based BRCA testing with varying Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry

BACKGROUND

Population-based BRCA1/BRCA2 testing has been found to be cost-effective compared with family history-based testing in Ashkenazi-Jewish women were >30 years old with 4 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparents. However, individuals may have 1, 2, or 3 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparents, and cost-effectiveness data are lacking at these lower BRCA prevalence estimates. We present an updated cost-effectiveness analysis of population BRCA1/BRCA2 testing for women with 1, 2, and 3 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparents.

STUDY DESIGN

Decision analysis model.

METHODS

Lifetime costs and effects of population and family history-based testing were compared with the use of a decision analysis model. 56% BRCA carriers are missed by family history criteria alone. Analyses were conducted for United Kingdom and United States populations. Model parameters were obtained from the Genetic Cancer Prediction through Population Screening trial and published literature. Model parameters and BRCA population prevalence for individuals with 3, 2, or 1 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparent were adjusted for the relative frequency of BRCA mutations in the Ashkenazi-Jewish and general populations. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated for all Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparent scenarios. Costs, along with outcomes, were discounted at 3.5%. The time horizon of the analysis is "life-time," and perspective is "payer." Probabilistic sensitivity analysis evaluated model uncertainty.

RESULTS

Population testing for BRCA mutations is cost-saving in Ashkenazi-Jewish women with 2, 3, or 4 grandparents (22-33 days life-gained) in the United Kingdom and 1, 2, 3, or 4 grandparents (12-26 days life-gained) in the United States populations, respectively. It is also extremely cost-effective in women in the United Kingdom with just 1 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparent with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £863 per quality-adjusted life-years and 15 days life gained. Results show that population-testing remains cost-effective at the £20,000-30000 per quality-adjusted life-years and $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-years willingness-to-pay thresholds for all 4 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparent scenarios, with ≥95% simulations found to be cost-effective on probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Population-testing remains cost-effective in the absence of reduction in breast cancer risk from oophorectomy and at lower risk-reducing mastectomy (13%) or risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (20%) rates.

CONCLUSION

Population testing for BRCA mutations with varying levels of Ashkenazi-Jewish ancestry is cost-effective in the United Kingdom and the United States. These results support population testing in Ashkenazi-Jewish women with 1-4 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparent ancestry.