RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to describe the clinical impact of commercial laboratories issuing conflicting classifications of genetic variants. METHODS: Results from 2000 patients undergoing a multigene hereditary cancer panel by a single laboratory were analyzed. Clinically significant discrepancies between the laboratory-provided test reports and other major commercial laboratories were identified, including differences between pathogenic/likely pathogenic and variant of uncertain significance (VUS) classifications, via review of ClinVar archives. For patients carrying a VUS, clinical documentation was assessed for evidence of provider awareness of the conflict. RESULTS: Fifty of 975 (5.1%) patients with non-negative results carried a variant with a clinically significant conflict, 19 with a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant reported in APC or MUTYH, and 31 with a VUS reported in CDKN2A, CHEK2, MLH1, MSH2, MUTYH, RAD51C, or TP53. Only 10 of 28 (36%) patients with a VUS with a clinically significant conflict had a documented discussion by a provider about the conflict. Discrepant counseling strategies were used for different patients with the same variant. Among patients with a CDKN2A variant or a monoallelic MUTYH variant, providers were significantly more likely to make recommendations based on the laboratory-reported classification. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the frequency of variant interpretation discrepancies and importance of clinician awareness. Guidance is needed on managing patients with discrepant variants to support accurate risk assessment.
Asunto(s)
Variación Genética , Neoplasias , Humanos , Neoplasias/genética , Laboratorios , Pruebas Genéticas/métodos , Predisposición Genética a la EnfermedadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The American Society of Breast Surgeons recommends genetic testing (GT) for all women with breast cancer (BC), but implementation and uptake of GT has not been well-described. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed for newly diagnosed BC patients or patients with a newly identified recurrence of BC seen in a multidisciplinary clinic (MDBC) who were offered genetic counseling (GC) and GT. RESULTS: The 138 women attending the MDBC had a median age of 54 years and comprised non-Hispanic whites (46%), Asians (28%), Hispanics (17%), blacks (4%), and other (5%). Of the 105 (76%) patients without prior GT, 100 (95%) accepted GC, with 93 (93%) of these 100 patients undergoing GT. The patients meeting the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for GT were more likely to undergo GT. Testing was performed with a 67- to 84-gene panel, together with an 8- to 9-gene STAT panel if needed. Among 120 patients with reports available, including 33 patients previously tested, 15 (12%) were positive (1 BLM, 1 BRCA1, 3 BRCA2, 1 BRIP1, 1 CFTR, 1 CHEK2, 1 MUTYH, 1 PALB2, 1 PRSS1, 1 RAD50, 1 RET, and 2 TP53), 44 (37%) were negative, and 61 (51%) had an uncertain variant. The median time to STAT results (n = 50) was 8 days. The STAT results were available before surgery for 47 (98%) of the 48 STAT patients undergoing surgery. CONCLUSIONS: New BC patients attending the MDBC demonstrated high rates of acceptance of GC and GT. The combination of GC and GT can offer timely information critical to patient risk assessment and treatment planning.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Pruebas Genéticas/métodos , Genes BRCA2 , Asesoramiento Genético , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Mutación de Línea GerminalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the psychological outcomes of germline multigene panel testing, particularly among diverse patients and those with moderate-risk pathogenic variants (PVs). METHODS: Study participants (N = 1264) were counseled and tested with a 25- or 28-gene panel and completed a 3-month postresult survey including the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA). RESULTS: The mean age was 52 years, 80% were female, and 70% had cancer; 45% were non-Hispanic White, 37% were Hispanic, 10% were Asian, 3% were Black, and 5% had another race/ethnicity. Approximately 28% had a high school education or less, and 23% were non-English-speaking. The genetic test results were as follows: 7% had a high-risk PV, 6% had a moderate-risk PV, 35% had a variant of uncertain significance (VUS), and 52% were negative. Most participants (92%) had a total MICRA score ≤ 38, which corresponded to a mean response of "never," "rarely," or only "sometimes" reacting negatively to results. A multivariate analysis found that mean total MICRA scores were significantly higher (more uncertainty/distress) among high- and moderate-risk PV carriers (29.7 and 24.8, respectively) than those with a VUS or negative results (17.4 and 16.1, respectively). Having cancer or less education was associated with a significantly higher total MICRA score; race/ethnicity was not associated with the total MICRA score. High- and moderate-risk PV carriers did not differ significantly from one another in the total MICRA score, uncertainty, distress, or positive experiences. CONCLUSIONS: In a diverse population undergoing genetic counseling and multigene panel testing for hereditary cancer risk, the psychological response corresponded to test results and showed low distress and uncertainty. Further studies are needed to assess patient understanding and subsequent cancer screening among patients from diverse backgrounds. LAY SUMMARY: Multigene panel tests for hereditary cancer have become widespread despite concerns about adverse psychological reactions among carriers of moderate-risk pathogenic variants (mutations) and among carriers of variants of uncertain significance. This large study of an ethnically and economically diverse cohort of patients undergoing panel testing found that 92% "never," "rarely," or only "sometimes" reacted negatively to results. Somewhat higher uncertainty and distress were identified among carriers of high- and moderate-risk pathogenic variants, and lower levels were identified among those with a variant of uncertain significance or a negative result. Although the psychological response corresponded to risk, reactions to testing were favorable, regardless of results.
Asunto(s)
Asesoramiento Genético/psicología , Pruebas Genéticas/métodos , Células Germinativas , Neoplasias/genética , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Pueblo Asiatico/estadística & datos numéricos , Población Negra/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Tamización de Portadores Genéticos , Hispánicos o Latinos/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias/etnología , Neoplasias/psicología , Distrés Psicológico , Medición de Riesgo/etnología , Factores Socioeconómicos , Incertidumbre , Población Blanca/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Pruebas Genéticas , Comunicación en Salud , Neoplasias/genética , Neoplasias/psicología , Conducta Social , Familia/etnología , Familia/psicología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mutación , Neoplasias/etnologíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Mutations in the CDH1 gene confer up to an 80% lifetime risk of diffuse gastric cancer and up to a 60% lifetime risk of lobular breast cancer. Testing for CDH1 mutations is recommended for individuals who meet the International Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium (IGCLC) guidelines. However, the interpretation of unexpected CDH1 mutations identified in patients who do not meet IGCLC criteria or do not have phenotypes suggestive of hereditary diffuse gastric cancer is clinically challenging. This study aims to describe phenotypes of CDH1 mutation carriers identified through multigene panel testing (MGPT) and to offer informed recommendations for medical management. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional prevalence study included all patients who underwent MGPT between March 2012 and September 2014 from a commercial laboratory (n = 26,936) and an academic medical center cancer genetics clinic (n = 318) to estimate CDH1 mutation prevalence and associated clinical phenotypes. CDH1 mutation carriers were classified as IGCLC positive (met criteria), IGCLC partial phenotype, and IGCLC negative. RESULTS: In the laboratory cohort, 16 (0.06%) of 26,936 patients were identified as having a pathogenic CDH1 mutation. In the clinic cohort, four (1.26%) of 318 had a pathogenic CDH1 mutation. Overall, 65% of mutation carriers did not meet the revised testing criteria published in 2015. All three CDH1 mutation carriers who had risk-reducing gastrectomy had pathologic evidence of diffuse gastric cancer despite not having met IGCLC criteria. CONCLUSION: The majority of CDH1 mutations identified on MGPT are unexpected and found in individuals who do not fit the accepted diagnostic testing criteria. These test results alter the medical management of CDH1-positive patients and families and provide opportunities for early detection and risk reduction.
RESUMEN
This study aims to assess multi-gene panel testing in an ethnically diverse clinical cancer genetics practice. We conducted a retrospective study of individuals with a personal or family history of cancer undergoing clinically indicated multi-gene panel tests of 6-110 genes, from six commercial laboratories. The 475 patients in the study included 228 Hispanics (47.6%), 166 non-Hispanic Whites (35.4%), 55 Asians (11.6%), 19 Blacks (4.0%), and seven others (1.5%). Panel testing found that 15.6% (74/475) of patients carried deleterious mutations for a total of 79 mutations identified. This included 7.4% (35/475) of patients who had a mutation identified that would not have been tested with a gene-by-gene approach. The identification of a panel-added mutation impacted clinical management for most of cases (69%, 24/35), and genetic testing was recommended for the first degree relatives of nearly all of them (91%, 32/35). Variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) were identified in a higher proportion of tests performed in ethnic minorities. Multi-gene panel testing increases the yield of mutations detected and adds to the capability of providing individualized cancer risk assessment. VUSs represent an interpretive challenge due to less data available outside of White, non-Hispanic populations. Further studies are necessary to expand understanding of the implementation and utilization of panels across broad clinical settings and patient populations.
Asunto(s)
Mutación , Neoplasias/etnología , Neoplasias/genética , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad/etnología , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad/genética , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de RiesgoRESUMEN
Although Gardner fibroma is a precursor lesion of desmoid tumor, the prevalence and prognostic importance of Gardner fibroma associated with desmoid tumors has not been systematically studied in adults. From 129 patients with desmoid-type fibromatosis, 170 specimens were re-examined for the presence of an associated Gardner fibroma. Clinicopathologic features of Gardner fibroma-associated desmoid-type fibromatosis were compared to desmoid tumors without associated Gardner fibroma. Recurrence-free survival was compared using multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression to account for known confounding factors. Of 104 evaluable primary desmoid tumor resections, 25 (24%) had an associated Gardner fibroma. When previous incisional biopsies and resection specimens of locally recurrent desmoid tumors were also examined, the overall prevalence of associated Gardner fibroma was 37%. Desmoid tumors arising in high risk anatomic sites (extremities or deep soft tissues of the back and chest wall) were more often associated with Gardner fibroma than tumors at other sites. Median recurrence-free survival for patients with Gardner fibroma-associated desmoid-type fibromatosis was 3.2 years, whereas median survival for patients without associated Gardner fibroma was >25 years (hazard ratio 2.8; P = 0.001). Although the presence of Gardner fibroma had no impact on the recurrence rate of desmoid tumors arising at high risk anatomic sites, associated Gardner fibroma increased the risk of recurrence 4-fold for desmoid tumors at low risk anatomic sites. Associated Gardner fibroma is under-recognized in desmoid-type fibromatosis and increases the risk of local recurrence for a subgroup of patients.
Asunto(s)
Fibromatosis Agresiva/epidemiología , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/epidemiología , Adolescente , Adulto , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Fibroma/epidemiología , Fibroma/patología , Fibromatosis Agresiva/patología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Prevalencia , Pronóstico , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome contributes to 5% of all colorectal cancers. Patients seen in most surgical clinics have limited or no family histories documented and are rarely assessed for hereditary syndromes. In 2007 a clinic-based hereditary colorectal cancer registry was established to screen for Lynch syndrome and facilitate genetic counseling/testing. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the hereditary colorectal cancer registry to identify high-risk colorectal cancer patients and have them referred for genetic counseling/testing for Lynch syndrome. DESIGN: A retrospective review and cohort comparison of both prospectively collected and retrospective data. SETTING: The colorectal surgical clinic at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. PATIENTS: All newly diagnosed colorectal cancer patients seen between January 2006 and October 2010. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: To assess the identification of colorectal cancer patients at high risk for Lynch syndrome and for the occurrence of genetic counseling/testing before and after the establishment of a hereditary registry by comparing the results from the colorectal cancer patients seen the year prior to the establishment of the registry (January - December 2006, "control period") with those patients seen after initiation of the registry (January 2007 - October 2010, "registry period"). RESULTS: During the "registry period," 495 colorectal cancer patients were seen in the clinic and 257 (51.9%) were high risk for Lynch syndrome. Forty-nine patients (9.8%) underwent genetic testing, with 27 (5.4%) positive for a gene mutation, of which half were >50 years old. By comparison, in 2006, 115 colorectal cancer patients were seen in the clinic but only 4 patients (3.5%) went on for further assessment, and only 1 had genetic testing. Retrospective assessment showed that at least 22 patients (19.1%) had warranted further investigation in 2006. LIMITATIONS: This was a single-institution, retrospective review. CONCLUSION: Establishment of a hereditary colorectal cancer registry with a clinic-based protocol improves identification of Lynch syndrome.