Reproductive characteristics, menopausal status, race and ethnicity, and risk of breast cancer subtypes defined by ER, PR and HER2 status: the Breast Cancer Etiology in Minorities study.

BACKGROUND: Associations between reproductive factors and risk of breast cancer differ by subtype defined by joint estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and HER2 expression status. Racial and ethnic differences in the incidence of breast cancer subtypes suggest etiologic heterogeneity, yet data are limited because most studies have included non-Hispanic White women only. METHODS: We analyzed harmonized data for 2,794 breast cancer cases and 4,579 controls, of whom 90% self-identified as African American, Asian American or Hispanic. Questionnaire data were pooled from three population-based studies conducted in California and data on tumor characteristics were obtained from the California Cancer Registry. The study sample included 1,530 luminal A (ER-positive and/or PR-positive, HER2-negative), 442 luminal B (ER-positive and/or PR-positive, HER2-positive), 578 triple-negative (TN; ER-negative, PR-negative, HER2-negative), and 244 HER2-enriched (ER-negative, PR-negative, HER2-positive) cases. We used multivariable unconditional logistic regression models to estimate subtype-specific ORs and 95% confidence intervals associated with parity, breast-feeding, and other reproductive characteristics by menopausal status and race and ethnicity. RESULTS: Subtype-specific associations with reproductive factors revealed some notable differences by menopausal status and race and ethnicity. Specifically, higher parity without breast-feeding was associated with higher risk of luminal A and TN subtypes among premenopausal African American women. In contrast, among Asian American and Hispanic women, regardless of menopausal status, higher parity with a breast-feeding history was associated with lower risk of luminal A subtype. Among premenopausal women only, luminal A subtype was associated with older age at first full-term pregnancy (FTP), longer interval between menarche and first FTP, and shorter interval since last FTP, with similar OR estimates across the three racial and ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Subtype-specific associations with reproductive factors overall and by menopausal status, and race and ethnicity, showed some differences, underscoring that understanding etiologic heterogeneity in racially and ethnically diverse study samples is essential. Breast-feeding is likely the only reproductive factor that is potentially modifiable. Targeted efforts to promote and facilitate breast-feeding could help mitigate the adverse effects of higher parity among premenopausal African American women.

Validation of a clinical breast cancer risk assessment tool combining a polygenic score for all ancestries with traditional risk factors.

PURPOSE: We previously described a combined risk score (CRS) that integrates a multiple-ancestry polygenic risk score (MA-PRS) with the Tyrer-Cuzick (TC) model to assess breast cancer (BC) risk. Here, we present a longitudinal validation of CRS in a real-world cohort. METHODS: This study included 130,058 patients referred for hereditary cancer genetic testing and negative for germline pathogenic variants in BC-associated genes. Data were obtained by linking genetic test results to medical claims (median follow-up 12.1 months). CRS calibration was evaluated by the ratio of observed to expected BCs. RESULTS: Three hundred forty BCs were observed over 148,349 patient-years. CRS was well-calibrated and demonstrated superior calibration compared with TC in high-risk deciles. MA-PRS alone had greater discriminatory accuracy than TC, and CRS had approximately 2-fold greater discriminatory accuracy than MA-PRS or TC. Among those classified as high risk by TC, 32.6% were low risk by CRS, and of those classified as low risk by TC, 4.3% were high risk by CRS. In cases where CRS and TC classifications disagreed, CRS was more accurate in predicting incident BC. CONCLUSION: CRS was well-calibrated and significantly improved BC risk stratification. Short-term follow-up suggests that clinical implementation of CRS should improve outcomes for patients of all ancestries through personalized risk-based screening and prevention.

Family communication of cancer genetic test results in an ethnically diverse population: a qualitative exploration of more than 200 patients.

Previous research on family communication of cancer genetic test results has primarily focused on non-Hispanic White patients with high-risk pathogenic variants (PV). There are limited data on patient communication of moderate-risk PVs, variants of uncertain significance (VUS), and negative results. This qualitative study examined communication of positive, negative, and VUS hereditary cancer multi-gene panel (MGP) results in an ethnically and socioeconomically diverse population. As part of a multicenter, prospective cohort study of 2000 patients who underwent MGP testing at three hospitals in California, USA, free-text written survey responses to the question: "Feel free to share any thoughts or experiences with discussing genetic test results with others" were collected from participant questionnaires administered at 3 and 12-months post results disclosure. Content and thematic analyses were performed using a theory-driven analysis, Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), on 256 responses from 214 respondents. Respondents with high perceived utility of sharing genetic test results often reported positive attitudes towards sharing test results and direct encouragement for genetic testing of others. Respondents with high self-efficacy in the sharing process were likely to report high perceived utility of sharing, whereas patients with low self-efficacy more often had VUS results and were more likely to report uncertainty about sharing. Consistent with TPB, our findings suggest that clinician reinforcement of the utility of genetic testing may increase intent for patients to communicate genetic information. Our findings suggest that clinicians should focus on strategies to improve patient understanding of VUS results.

Emergency department involvement in the diagnosis of cancer among older adults: a SEER-Medicare study.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, 20-50% of cancer is diagnosed through emergency presentation, which is associated with lower survival, poor patient experience, and socioeconomic disparities, but population-based evidence about emergency diagnosis in the U.S. is limited. We estimated Emergency Department (ED) involvement in the diagnosis of cancer in a nationally representative population of older US adults, and associations with sociodemographic, clinical, and tumor characteristics. METHODS: We analyzed SEER-Medicare data for Medicare beneficiaries (≥66 years old) diagnosed with female breast, colorectal, lung and prostate cancers (2008-2017), defining their earliest cancer-related claim as their index date, and patients who visited the ED 0-30 days before their index date to have "ED involvement" in their diagnosis, with stratification as 0-7 or 8-30 days. We estimated covariate-adjusted associations of patient age, sex, race/ethnicity, marital status, comorbidity score, tumor stage, diagnosis year, rurality, and census tract poverty with ED involvement using modified Poisson regression. RESULTS: Among 614,748 patients, 23% had ED involvement with 18% visiting the ED in the 0-7 days before their index date. This varied greatly by tumor site: breast 8%, colorectal 39%, lung 40%, prostate 7%. In adjusted models, older age, female sex, non-Hispanic Black and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander race, being unmarried, recent diagnosis year, later-stage disease, comorbidities, and poverty were associated with ED involvement. CONCLUSIONS: The ED may be involved in the initial identification of cancer for 1 in 5 patients. Earlier, system-level identification of cancer in non-ED settings should be prioritized, especially among underserved populations.

Collaborative Modeling to Compare Different Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Decision Analysis for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: The effects of breast cancer incidence changes and advances in screening and treatment on outcomes of different screening strategies are not well known. Objective: To estimate outcomes of various mammography screening strategies. Design, Setting, and Population: Comparison of outcomes using 6 Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models and national data on breast cancer incidence, mammography performance, treatment effects, and other-cause mortality in US women without previous cancer diagnoses. Exposures: Thirty-six screening strategies with varying start ages (40, 45, 50 years) and stop ages (74, 79 years) with digital mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) annually, biennially, or a combination of intervals. Strategies were evaluated for all women and for Black women, assuming 100% screening adherence and "real-world" treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated lifetime benefits (breast cancer deaths averted, percent reduction in breast cancer mortality, life-years gained), harms (false-positive recalls, benign biopsies, overdiagnosis), and number of mammograms per 1000 women. Results: Biennial screening with DBT starting at age 40, 45, or 50 years until age 74 years averted a median of 8.2, 7.5, or 6.7 breast cancer deaths per 1000 women screened, respectively, vs no screening. Biennial DBT screening at age 40 to 74 years (vs no screening) was associated with a 30.0% breast cancer mortality reduction, 1376 false-positive recalls, and 14 overdiagnosed cases per 1000 women screened. Digital mammography screening benefits were similar to those for DBT but had more false-positive recalls. Annual screening increased benefits but resulted in more false-positive recalls and overdiagnosed cases. Benefit-to-harm ratios of continuing screening until age 79 years were similar or superior to stopping at age 74. In all strategies, women with higher-than-average breast cancer risk, higher breast density, and lower comorbidity level experienced greater screening benefits than other groups. Annual screening of Black women from age 40 to 49 years with biennial screening thereafter reduced breast cancer mortality disparities while maintaining similar benefit-to-harm trade-offs as for all women. Conclusions: This modeling analysis suggests that biennial mammography screening starting at age 40 years reduces breast cancer mortality and increases life-years gained per mammogram. More intensive screening for women with greater risk of breast cancer diagnosis or death can maintain similar benefit-to-harm trade-offs and reduce mortality disparities.

Racial disparities in breast cancer risk factors and risk management.

Racial disparities in breast cancer outcomes are well described across the spectrum of screening, diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship. Breast cancer mortality is markedly elevated for Non-Hispanic Black women compared with other racial and ethnic groups, with multifactorial causes. Here, we aim to reduce this burden by identifying disparities in breast cancer risk factors, risk assessment, and risk management before breast cancer is diagnosed. We describe a reproductive profile and modifiable risk factors specific to the development of triple-negative breast cancer. We also propose that screening strategies should be both risk- and race-based, given the prevalence of early-onset triple-negative breast cancer in young Black women. We emphasize the importance of early risk assessment and identification of patients at hereditary and familial risk and discuss indications for a high-risk referral. We discuss the subtleties following genetic testing and highlight "uncertain" genetic testing results and risk estimation challenges in women who test negative. We trace aspects of the obesity epidemic in the Black community to infant feeding patterns and emphasize healthy eating and activity. Finally, we discuss building an environment of trust to foster adherence to recommendations, follow-up care, and participation in clinical trials. Addressing relevant social determinants of health; educating patients and clinicians on factors impacting disparities in outcomes; and encouraging participation in targeted, culturally sensitive research are essential to best serve all communities.

A scoping review of web-based, interactive, personalized decision-making tools available to support breast cancer treatment and survivorship care.

PURPOSE: We reviewed existing personalized, web-based, interactive decision-making tools available to guide breast cancer treatment and survivorship care decisions in clinical settings. METHODS: The study was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). We searched PubMed and related databases for interactive web-based decision-making tools developed to support breast cancer treatment and survivorship care from 2013 to 2023. Information on each tool's purpose, target population, data sources, individual and contextual characteristics, outcomes, validation, and usability testing were extracted. We completed a quality assessment for each tool using the International Patient Decision Aid Standard (IPDAS) instrument. RESULTS: We found 54 tools providing personalized breast cancer outcomes (e.g., recurrence) and treatment recommendations (e.g., chemotherapy) based on individual clinical (e.g., stage), genomic (e.g., 21-gene-recurrence score), behavioral (e.g., smoking), and contextual (e.g., insurance) characteristics. Forty-five tools were validated, and nine had undergone usability testing. However, validation and usability testing included mostly White, educated, and/or insured individuals. The average quality assessment score of the tools was 16 (range: 6-46; potential maximum: 63). CONCLUSIONS: There was wide variation in the characteristics, quality, validity, and usability of the tools. Future studies should consider diverse populations for tool development and testing. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: There are tools available to support personalized breast cancer treatment and survivorship care decisions in clinical settings. It is important for both cancer survivors and physicians to carefully consider the quality, validity, and usability of these tools before using them to guide care decisions.

Incidence of Nonkeratinocyte Skin Cancer After Breast Cancer Radiation Therapy.

Importance: Previous studies have suggested that radiation therapy may contribute to an increased risk of subsequent nonkeratinocyte (ie, not squamous and basal cell) skin cancers. Objective: To test the hypothesis that radiation therapy for breast cancer increases the risk of subsequent nonkeratinocyte skin cancers, particularly when these cancers are localized to the skin of the breast or trunk. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study used longitudinal data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program for January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2019. The SEER database includes population-based cohort data from 17 registries. Patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer were identified and were evaluated for subsequent nonkeratinocyte skin cancer development. Data analysis was performed from January to August 2023. Exposures: Radiation therapy, chemotherapy, or surgery for breast cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for subsequent nonkeratinocyte skin cancer development from 2000 to 2019 based on treatment type (radiation therapy, chemotherapy, or surgery), skin cancer site on the body, and skin cancer subtype. Results: Among the 875 880 patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer included in this study, 99.3% were women, 51.6% were aged older than 60 years, and 50.3% received radiation therapy. A total of 11.2% patients identified as Hispanic, 10.1% identified as non-Hispanic Black, and 69.5% identified as non-Hispanic White. From 2000 to 2019, there were 3839 patients with nonkeratinocyte skin cancer, including melanoma (3419 [89.1%]), Merkel cell carcinoma (121 [3.2%]), hemangiosarcoma (104 [2.7%]), and 32 other nonkeratinocyte skin cancers (195 [5.1%]), documented to occur after breast cancer treatment. The risk of nonkeratinocyte skin cancer diagnosis after breast cancer treatment with radiation was 57% higher (SIR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.45-1.7]) than that of the general population when considering the most relevant site: the skin of the breast or trunk. When risk at this site was stratified by skin cancer subtype, the SIRs for melanoma and hemangiosarcoma were both statistically significant at 1.37 (95% CI, 1.25-1.49) and 27.11 (95% CI, 21.6-33.61), respectively. Receipt of radiation therapy was associated with a greater risk of nonkeratinocyte skin cancer compared with chemotherapy and surgical interventions. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of patients with breast cancer, an increased risk of melanoma and hemangiosarcoma after breast cancer treatment with radiation therapy was observed. Although occurrences of nonkeratinocyte skin cancers are rare, physicians should be aware of this elevated risk to help inform follow-up care.

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and breast cancer mortality in racially and ethnically diverse participants of the Northern California Breast Cancer Family Registry.

Stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (sTIL) enrichment in pretreatment breast tumors has been associated with superior response to neoadjuvant treatment and survival. In a population-based cohort, we studied sTIL-survival associations by race and ethnicity. We assessed associations of continuous sTIL scores and sTIL-enriched breast cancers (defined as percent lymphocytic infiltration of tumor stroma or cell nests at cutoffs of 30%, 50%, and 70%) with clinical and epidemiologic characteristics and conducted multivariable survival analyses. Although we identified no difference in sTIL score by race and ethnicity, higher continuous sTIL score was associated with lower breast cancer-specific mortality only among non-Hispanic White and Asian American but not African American and Hispanic women. This finding suggests that complex factors influence treatment response and survival, given that sTIL enrichment was not associated with a survival advantage among women from minoritized groups, who more often experience health disparities. Further study of patient selection for sTIL-guided treatment strategies is warranted.

Germline Testing in Patients With Breast Cancer: ASCO-Society of Surgical Oncology Guideline.

PURPOSE: To develop recommendations for germline mutation testing for patients with breast cancer. METHODS: An ASCO-Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) panel convened to develop recommendations based on a systematic review and formal consensus process. RESULTS: Forty-seven articles met eligibility criteria for the germline mutation testing recommendations; 18 for the genetic counseling recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS: BRCA1/2 mutation testing should be offered to all newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer ≤65 years and select patients >65 years based on personal history, family history, ancestry, or eligibility for poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor therapy. All patients with recurrent breast cancer who are candidates for PARP inhibitor therapy should be offered BRCA1/2 testing, regardless of family history. BRCA1/2 testing should be offered to women who develop a second primary cancer in the ipsilateral or contralateral breast. For patients with prior history of breast cancer and without active disease, testing should be offered to patients diagnosed ≤65 years and selectively in patients diagnosed after 65 years, if it will inform personal and family risk. Testing for high-penetrance cancer susceptibility genes beyond BRCA1/2 should be offered to those with supportive family histories; testing for moderate-penetrance genes may be offered if necessary to inform personal and family cancer risk. Patients should be provided enough pretest information for informed consent; those with pathogenic variants should receive individualized post-test counseling. Variants of uncertain significance should not impact management, and patients with such variants should be followed for reclassification. Referral to providers experienced in clinical cancer genetics may help facilitate patient selection and interpretation of expanded testing, and provide counseling of individuals without pathogenic germline variants but with significant family history.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Analysis of Breast Cancer Mortality in the US-1975 to 2019.

Importance: Breast cancer mortality in the US declined between 1975 and 2019. The association of changes in metastatic breast cancer treatment with improved breast cancer mortality is unclear. Objective: To simulate the relative associations of breast cancer screening, treatment of stage I to III breast cancer, and treatment of metastatic breast cancer with improved breast cancer mortality. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using aggregated observational and clinical trial data on the dissemination and effects of screening and treatment, 4 Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models simulated US breast cancer mortality rates. Death due to breast cancer, overall and by estrogen receptor and ERBB2 (formerly HER2) status, among women aged 30 to 79 years in the US from 1975 to 2019 was simulated. Exposures: Screening mammography, treatment of stage I to III breast cancer, and treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: Model-estimated age-adjusted breast cancer mortality rate associated with screening, stage I to III treatment, and metastatic treatment relative to the absence of these exposures was assessed, as was model-estimated median survival after breast cancer metastatic recurrence. Results: The breast cancer mortality rate in the US (age adjusted) was 48/100 000 women in 1975 and 27/100 000 women in 2019. In 2019, the combination of screening, stage I to III treatment, and metastatic treatment was associated with a 58% reduction (model range, 55%-61%) in breast cancer mortality. Of this reduction, 29% (model range, 19%-33%) was associated with treatment of metastatic breast cancer, 47% (model range, 35%-60%) with treatment of stage I to III breast cancer, and 25% (model range, 21%-33%) with mammography screening. Based on simulations, the greatest change in survival after metastatic recurrence occurred between 2000 and 2019, from 1.9 years (model range, 1.0-2.7 years) to 3.2 years (model range, 2.0-4.9 years). Median survival for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive/ERBB2-positive breast cancer improved by 2.5 years (model range, 2.0-3.4 years), whereas median survival for ER-/ERBB2- breast cancer improved by 0.5 years (model range, 0.3-0.8 years). Conclusions and Relevance: According to 4 simulation models, breast cancer screening and treatment in 2019 were associated with a 58% reduction in US breast cancer mortality compared with interventions in 1975. Simulations suggested that treatment for stage I to III breast cancer was associated with approximately 47% of the mortality reduction, whereas treatment for metastatic breast cancer was associated with 29% of the reduction and screening with 25% of the reduction.

Avoiding lead-time bias by estimating stage-specific proportions of cancer and non-cancer deaths.

PURPOSE: Understanding how stage at cancer diagnosis influences cause of death, an endpoint that is not susceptible to lead-time bias, can inform population-level outcomes of cancer screening. METHODS: Using data from 17 US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries for 1,154,515 persons aged 50-84 years at cancer diagnosis in 2006-2010, we evaluated proportional causes of death by cancer type and uniformly classified stage, following or extrapolating all patients until death through 2020. RESULTS: Most cancer patients diagnosed at stages I-II did not go on to die from their index cancer, whereas most patients diagnosed at stage IV did. For patients diagnosed with any cancer at stages I-II, an estimated 26% of deaths were due to the index cancer, 63% due to non-cancer causes, and 12% due to a subsequent primary (non-index) cancer. In contrast, for patients diagnosed with any stage IV cancer, 85% of deaths were attributed to the index cancer, with 13% non-cancer and 2% non-index-cancer deaths. Index cancer mortality from stages I-II cancer was proportionally lowest for thyroid, melanoma, uterus, prostate, and breast, and highest for pancreas, liver, esophagus, lung, and stomach. CONCLUSION: Across all cancer types, the percentage of patients who went on to die from their cancer was over three times greater when the cancer was diagnosed at stage IV than stages I-II. As mortality patterns are not influenced by lead-time bias, these data suggest that earlier detection is likely to improve outcomes across cancer types, including those currently unscreened.

Recurrent BRCA2 exon 3 deletion in Assyrian families.

We identified six patients from five families with a recurrent mutation: NM_000059.3 (BRCA2) exon 3 deletion. All families self-identified as Assyrian. Assyrians are an ethnoreligious population of ancient Mesopotamia, now mostly living in modern day Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran. They are historically a socially isolated population with intermarriage within their community, living as a religious and language minority in mostly Muslim countries. The probands of each family presented with a classic BRCA2-associated cancer including early-onset breast cancer, epithelial serous ovarian cancer, male breast cancer and/or high-grade prostate cancer, and family history that was also significant for BRCA2-associated cancer. BRCA2 exon 3 deletion is classified as pathogenic and has been previously described in the literature, but it has not been described as a founder mutation in a particular population. We characterise this recurrent BRCA2 pathogenic variant in five Assyrian families in a single centre cohort.

Cascade testing for hereditary cancer: comprehensive multigene panels identify unexpected actionable findings in relatives.

Current guidelines recommend single variant testing in relatives of patients with known pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants in cancer predisposition genes. This approach may preclude the use of risk-reducing strategies in family members who have pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants in other cancer predisposition genes. Cascade testing using multigene panels was performed in 3696 relatives of 7433 probands. Unexpected pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants were identified in 230 (6.2%) relatives, including 144 who were negative for the familial pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant but positive for a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant in a different gene than the proband and 74 who tested positive for the familial pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant and had an additional pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant in a different gene than the proband. Of the relatives with unexpected pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants, 36.3% would have qualified for different or additional cancer screening recommendations. Limiting cascade testing to only the familial pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant would have resulted in missed, actionable findings for a subset of relatives.

Endometrial Cancer Risk Among Germline BRCA1/2 Pathogenic Variant Carriers: Review of Our Current Understanding and Next Steps.

PURPOSE: To review the literature exploring endometrial cancer (EC) risk among surgical candidates with germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs) to guide decisions around risk-reducing (rr) hysterectomy in this population. DESIGN: A comprehensive review was conducted of the current literature that influences clinical practice and informs expert consensus. We present our understanding of EC risk among BRCA1/2 PV carriers, the risk-modifying factors specific to this patient population, and the available research technology that may guide clinical practice in the future. Limitations of the existing literature are outlined. RESULTS: Patients with BRCA1/2 PVs, those with a personal history of tamoxifen use, those who desire long-term hormone replacement therapy, and/or have an elevated BMI are at higher risk of EC, primarily endometrioid EC and/or uterine papillary serous carcinoma, and may benefit from rr-hysterectomy. Although prescriptive clinical guidelines specific to BRCA1/2 PV carriers could inform decisions around rr-hysterectomy, limitations of the current literature prevent more definitive guidance at this time. A large population-based study of a contemporary cohort of BRCA1/2 PV carriers with lifetime follow-up compared with cancer-gene negative controls would advance this topic and facilitate care decisions. CONCLUSION: This review validates a potential role for rr-hysterectomy to address EC risk among surgical candidates with BRCA1/2 PVs. Evidence-based clinical guidelines for rr-hysterectomy in BRCA1/2 PV carriers are essential to ensure equitable access to this preventive measure, supporting insurance coverage for patients with either BRCA1 or BRCA2 PVs to pursue rr-hysterectomy. Overall, this review highlights the complexity of EC risk in BRCA1/2 PV carriers and offers a comprehensive framework to shared decision making to inform rr-hysterectomy for BRCA1/2 PV carriers.

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.

Overall Survival Among Patients With De Novo Stage IV Metastatic and Distant Metastatic Recurrent Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Importance: Despite recent breakthroughs in therapy, advanced lung cancer still poses a therapeutic challenge. The survival profile of patients with metastatic lung cancer remains poorly understood by metastatic disease type (ie, de novo stage IV vs distant recurrence). Objective: To evaluate the association of metastatic disease type on overall survival (OS) among patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to identify potential mechanisms underlying any survival difference. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cohort study of a national US population based at a tertiary referral center in the San Francisco Bay Area using participant data from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) who were enrolled between 2002 and 2004 and followed up for up to 7 years as the primary cohort and patient data from Stanford Healthcare (SHC) for diagnoses between 2009 and 2019 and followed up for up to 13 years as the validation cohort. Participants from NLST with de novo metastatic or distant recurrent NSCLC diagnoses were included. Data were analyzed from January 2021 to March 2023. Exposures: De novo stage IV vs distant recurrent metastatic disease. Main Outcomes and Measures: OS after diagnosis of metastatic disease. Results: The NLST and SHC cohort consisted of 660 and 180 participants, respectively (411 men [62.3%] vs 109 men [60.6%], 602 White participants [91.2%] vs 111 White participants [61.7%], and mean [SD] age of 66.8 [5.5] vs 71.4 [7.9] years at metastasis, respectively). Patients with distant recurrence showed significantly better OS than patients with de novo metastasis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.87; P < .001) in NLST, which was replicated in SHC (aHR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.43-0.96; P = .03). In SHC, patients with de novo metastasis more frequently progressed to the bone (63 patients with de novo metastasis [52.5%] vs 19 patients with distant recurrence [31.7%]) or pleura (40 patients with de novo metastasis [33.3%] vs 8 patients with distant recurrence [13.3%]) than patients with distant recurrence and were primarily detected through symptoms (102 patients [85.0%]) as compared with posttreatment surveillance (47 patients [78.3%]) in the latter. The main finding remained consistent after further adjusting for metastasis sites and detection methods. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, patients with distant recurrent NSCLC had significantly better OS than those with de novo disease, and the latter group was associated with characteristics that may affect overall survival. This finding can help inform future clinical trial designs to ensure a balance for baseline patient characteristics.

Germline Genetic Testing After Cancer Diagnosis.

Importance: Germline genetic testing is recommended by practice guidelines for patients diagnosed with cancer to enable genetically targeted treatment and identify relatives who may benefit from personalized cancer screening and prevention. Objective: To describe the prevalence of germline genetic testing among patients diagnosed with cancer in California and Georgia between 2013 and 2019. Design, Setting, and Participants: Observational study including patients aged 20 years or older who had been diagnosed with any type of cancer between January 1, 2013, and March 31, 2019, that was reported to statewide Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries in California and Georgia. These patients were linked to genetic testing results from 4 laboratories that performed most germline testing for California and Georgia. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was germline genetic testing within 2 years of a cancer diagnosis. Testing trends were analyzed with logistic regression modeling. The results of sequencing each gene, including variants associated with increased cancer risk (pathogenic results) and variants whose cancer risk association was unknown (uncertain results), were evaluated. The genes were categorized according to their primary cancer association, including breast or ovarian, gastrointestinal, and other, and whether practice guidelines recommended germline testing. Results: Among 1 369 602 patients diagnosed with cancer between 2013 and 2019 in California and Georgia, 93 052 (6.8%) underwent germline testing through March 31, 2021. The proportion of patients tested varied by cancer type: male breast (50%), ovarian (38.6%), female breast (26%), multiple (7.5%), endometrial (6.4%), pancreatic (5.6%), colorectal (5.6%), prostate (1.1%), and lung (0.3%). In a logistic regression model, compared with the 31% (95% CI, 30%-31%) of non-Hispanic White patients with male breast cancer, female breast cancer, or ovarian cancer who underwent testing, patients of other races and ethnicities underwent testing less often: 22% (95% CI, 21%-22%) of Asian patients, 25% (95% CI, 24%-25%) of Black patients, and 23% (95% CI, 23%-23%) of Hispanic patients (P < .001 using the χ2 test). Of all pathogenic results, 67.5% to 94.9% of variants were identified in genes for which practice guidelines recommend testing and 68.3% to 83.8% of variants were identified in genes associated with the diagnosed cancer type. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients diagnosed with cancer in California and Georgia between 2013 and 2019, only 6.8% underwent germline genetic testing. Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, rates of testing were lower among Asian, Black, and Hispanic patients.