Age-specific breast and ovarian cancer risks associated with germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variants - an Asian study of 572 families.

Background: Clinical management of Asian BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants (PV) carriers remains challenging due to imprecise age-specific breast (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) risks estimates. We aimed to refine these estimates using six multi-ethnic studies in Asia. Methods: Data were collected on 271 BRCA1 and 301 BRCA2 families from Malaysia and Singapore, ascertained through population/hospital-based case-series (88%) and genetic clinics (12%). Age-specific cancer risks were estimated using a modified segregation analysis method, adjusted for ascertainment. Findings: BC and OC relative risks (RRs) varied across age groups for both BRCA1 and BRCA2. The age-specific RR estimates were similar across ethnicities and country of residence. For BRCA1 carriers of Malay, Indian and Chinese ancestry born between 1950 and 1959 in Malaysia, the cumulative risk (95% CI) of BC by age 80 was 40% (36%-44%), 49% (44%-53%) and 55% (51%-60%), respectively. The corresponding estimates for BRCA2 were 29% (26-32%), 36% (33%-40%) and 42% (38%-45%). The corresponding cumulative BC risks for Singapore residents from the same birth cohort, where the underlying population cancer incidences are higher compared to Malaysia, were higher, varying by ancestry group between 57 and 61% for BRCA1, and between 43 and 47% for BRCA2 carriers. The cumulative risk of OC by age 80 was 31% (27-36%) for BRCA1 and 12% (10%-15%) for BRCA2 carriers in Malaysia born between 1950 and 1959; and 42% (34-50%) for BRCA1 and 20% (14-27%) for BRCA2 carriers of the same birth cohort in Singapore. There was evidence of increased BC and OC risks for women from >1960 birth cohorts (p-value = 3.6 × 10-5 for BRCA1 and 0.018 for BRCA2). Interpretation: The absolute age-specific cancer risks of Asian carriers vary depending on the underlying population-specific cancer incidences, and hence should be customised to allow for more accurate cancer risk management. Funding: Wellcome Trust [grant no: v203477/Z/16/Z]; CRUK (PPRPGM-Nov20∖100002).

Impact of Variant Reclassification in Cancer Predisposition Genes on Clinical Care.

PURPOSE: Genetic testing has clinical utility in the management of patients with hereditary cancer syndromes. However, the increased likelihood of encountering a variant of uncertain significance in individuals of non-European descent such as Asians may be challenging to both clinicians and patients. This study aims to evaluate the impact of variant reclassification in an Asian country with variants of uncertain significance reported in cancer predisposition genes. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients seen at the Cancer Genetics Service at the National Cancer Centre Singapore between February 2014 and March 2020 was conducted. The frequency, direction, and time to variant reclassification were evaluated by comparing the reclassified report against the original report. RESULTS: A total of 1,412 variants of uncertain significance were reported in 49.9% (845 of 1,695) of patients. Over 6 years, 6.7% (94 of 1,412) of variants were reclassified. Most variants of uncertain significance (94.1%, 80 of 85) were downgraded to benign or likely benign variant, with a smaller proportion of variants of uncertain significance (5.9%, 5 of 85) upgraded to pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant. Actionable variants of uncertain significance upgrades and pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant downgrades, which resulted in management changes, happened in 31.0% (39 of 126) of patients. The median and mean time taken for reclassification were 1 and 1.62 year(s), respectively. CONCLUSION: We propose a clinical guideline to standardize management of patients reported to have variants of uncertain significance. Management should be based on the patient's personal history, family history, and variant interpretation. For clinically relevant or suspicious variants of uncertain significance, follow-up is recommended every 2 years, as actionable reclassifications may happen during this period.

Impact of subsidies on cancer genetic testing uptake in Singapore.

PURPOSE: Previous reports cite high costs of clinical cancer genetic testing as main barriers to patient's willingness to test. We report findings of a pilot study that evaluates how different subsidy schemes impact genetic testing uptake and total cost of cancer management. METHODS: We included all patients who attended the Cancer Genetics Service at the National Cancer Centre Singapore (January 2014-May 2016). Two subsidy schemes, the blanket scheme (100% subsidy to all eligible patients), and the varied scheme (patients received 50%-100% subsidy dependent on financial status) were compared. We estimated total spending on cancer management from government's perspective using a decision model. RESULTS: 445 patients were included. Contrasting against the blanket scheme, the varied scheme observed a higher attendance of patients (34 vs 8 patients per month), of which a higher proportion underwent genetic testing (5% vs 38%), while lowering subsidy spending per person (S$1098 vs S$1161). The varied scheme may potentially save cost by reducing unnecessary cancer surveillance when first-degree relatives uptake rate is above 36%. FINDINGS: Provision of subsidy leads to a considerable increase in genetic testing uptake rate. From the government's perspective, subsidising genetic testing may potentially reduce total costs on cancer management.