Deleterious Effects of Higher Body Mass Index on Subjective and Objective Measures of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy in Cancer Survivors.

CONTEXT: Recent, albeit, limited evidence suggests that body mass index (BMI) may be a modifiable risk factor to reduce the deleterious effects of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in cancer survivors. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate for differences in demographic, clinical, pain, sensation, and balance characteristics among three BMI groups. We hypothesized that as BMI increased, survivors would report higher pain intensity scores and have significant decrements in measures of sensation and balance. METHODS: A total of 416 survivors with CIPN were evaluated using subjective and objective measures of CIPN. Survivors were divided into three BMI groups (i.e., normal weight, overweight, and obese). Differences among the BMI groups were evaluated using parametric and nonparametric statistics. RESULTS: Of the 416 survivors, 45.4% were normal weight, 32.5% were overweight, and 22.1% were obese. Compared with the normal-weight group, survivors in the other two groups had lower functional status scores, a higher comorbidity burden, higher pain intensity scores, and higher interference scores. In addition, compared with the normal-weight group, survivors in the other two BMI groups had significantly worse balance scores. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the hypothesis that as BMI increased, pain sensation and balance characteristics worsened. Our findings suggest that nutritional counseling as well as exercise and weight management programs in survivors with CIPN may improve these clinically important problems.

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

PURPOSE: Multiplex gene panel testing (MGPT) allows for the simultaneous analysis of germline cancer susceptibility genes. This study describes the diagnostic yield and patient experiences of MGPT in diverse populations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter, prospective cohort study enrolled participants from three cancer genetics clinics-University of Southern California Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles County and University of Southern California Medical Center, and Stanford Cancer Institute-who met testing guidelines or had a 2.5% or greater probability of a pathogenic variant (N = 2,000). All patients underwent 25- or 28-gene MGPT and results were compared with differential genetic diagnoses generated by pretest expert clinical assessment. Post-test surveys on distress, uncertainty, and positive experiences were administered at 3 months (69% response rate) and 1 year (57% response rate). RESULTS: Of 2,000 participants, 81% were female, 41% were Hispanic, 26% were Spanish speaking only, and 30% completed high school or less education. A total of 242 participants (12%) carried one or more pathogenic variant (positive), 689 (34%) carried one or more variant of uncertain significance (VUS), and 1,069 (53%) carried no pathogenic variants or VUS (negative). More than one third of pathogenic variants (34%) were not included in the differential diagnosis. After testing, few patients (4%) had prophylactic surgery, most (92%) never regretted testing, and most (80%) wanted to know all results, even those of uncertain significance. Positive patients were twice as likely as negative/VUS patients (83% v 41%; P < .001) to encourage their relatives to be tested. CONCLUSION: In a racially/ethnically and socioeconomically diverse cohort, MGPT increased diagnostic yield. More than one third of identified pathogenic variants were not clinically anticipated. Patient regret and prophylactic surgery use were low, and patients appropriately encouraged relatives to be tested for clinically relevant results.

Patient communication of cancer genetic test results in a diverse population.

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

Racial/ethnic differences in multiple-gene sequencing results for hereditary cancer risk.

PurposeWe examined racial/ethnic differences in the usage and results of germ-line multiple-gene sequencing (MGS) panels to evaluate hereditary cancer risk.MethodsWe collected genetic testing results and clinical information from 1,483 patients who underwent MGS at Stanford University between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2015.ResultsAsians and Hispanics presented for MGS at younger ages than whites (48 and 47 vs. 55; P = 5E-16 and 5E-14). Across all panels, the rate of pathogenic variants (15%) did not differ significantly between racial groups. Rates by gene did differ: in particular, a higher percentage of whites than nonwhites carried pathogenic CHEK2 variants (3.8% vs. 1.0%; P = 0.002). The rate of a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) result was higher in nonwhites than whites (36% vs. 27%; P = 2E-4). The probability of a VUS increased with increasing number of genes tested; this effect was more pronounced for nonwhites than for whites (1.1% absolute difference in VUS rates testing BRCA1/2 vs. 8% testing 13 genes vs. 14% testing 28 genes), worsening the disparity.ConclusionIn this diverse cohort undergoing MGS testing, pathogenic variant rates were similar between racial/ethnic groups. By contrast, VUS results were more frequent among nonwhites, with potential significance for the impact of MGS testing by race/ethnicity.

Genetic predisposition to gastric cancer.

Gastric cancer ranks as the third leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide and confers a 5-year survival of 20%. While most gastric cancers are sporadic, ~1%-3% can be attributed to inherited cancer predisposition syndromes. Germline E-cadherin/CDH1 mutations have been identified in families with an autosomal dominant inherited predisposition to diffuse gastric cancer. The cumulative risk of gastric cancer for CDH1 mutation carriers by age 80 years is reportedly 70% for men and 56% for women. Female mutation carriers also have an estimated 42% risk for developing lobular breast cancer by age 80 years. However, most individuals meeting clinical criteria for hereditary diffuse gastric cancer syndrome (HDGC) do not have a germline CDH1 mutation, and germline CDH1 mutation carriers do not all exhibit similar clinical outcomes in terms of age of diagnosis or cancer types. E-cadherin (CDH1) as the one known causative gene for HDGC accounts for only 40% of cases, leaving 60% with an unknown genetic diagnosis. In addition to HDGC, we will review other genetic syndromes with elevated gastric cancer risk, as well as newly implicated alterations in other genes (CTNNA1, DOT1L, FBXO24, PRSS1, MAP3K6, MSR1, and INSR) that may affect gastric cancer susceptibility and age-specific penetrance.