Pretest Video Education Versus Genetic Counseling for Patients With Prostate Cancer: ProGen, A Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Germline genetic testing (GT) is recommended for men with prostate cancer (PC), but testing through traditional models is limited. The ProGen study examined a novel model aimed at providing access to GT while promoting education and informed consent. METHODS: Men with potentially lethal PC (metastatic, localized with a Gleason score of ≥8, persistent prostate-specific antigen after local therapy), diagnosis age ≤55 years, previous malignancy, and family history suggestive of a pathogenic variant (PV) and/or at oncologist's discretion were randomly assigned 3:1 to video education (VE) or in-person genetic counseling (GC). Participants had 67 genes analyzed (Ambry), with results disclosed via telephone by a genetic counselor. Outcomes included GT consent, GT completion, PV prevalence, and survey measures of satisfaction, psychological impact, genetics knowledge, and family communication. Two-sided Fisher's exact tests were used for between-arm comparisons. RESULTS: Over a 2-year period, 662 participants at three sites were randomly assigned and pretest VE (n = 498) or GC (n = 164) was completed by 604 participants (VE, 93.1%; GC, 88.8%), of whom 596 participants (VE, 98.9%; GC, 97.9%) consented to GT and 591 participants completed GT (VE, 99.3%; GC, 98.6%). These differences were not statistically significant although subtle differences in satisfaction and psychological impact were. Notably, 84 PVs were identified in 78 participants (13.2%), with BRCA1/2 PV comprising 32% of participants with a positive result (BRCA2 n = 21, BRCA1 n = 4). CONCLUSION: Both VE and traditional GC yielded high GT uptake without significant differences in outcome measures of completion, GT uptake, genetics knowledge, and family communication. The increased demand for GT with limited genetics resources supports consideration of pretest VE for patients with PC.

Embedding a genetic counselor into oncology clinics improves testing rates and timeliness for women with ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Germline genetic testing is crucial to the care of ovarian cancer patients, and as part of the guideline-based care for ovarian cancer patient's adherence to this recommendation has been low. We sought to determine whether embedding a genetic counselor (GC) within a medical and gynecologic oncology clinic would increase testing rates and improve the timeliness of testing. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 358 ovarian cancer patients seen by medical and gynecologic oncologists between 2013 and 2015. Rates of referrals, completion of counseling, and genetic testing and timeliness of counseling were abstracted before and after a GC was embedded in the clinic in 2014. An additional year of data (2015) was collected to evaluate sustainability of the intervention. RESULTS: Between 2013 and 2015, 88-92% of women were referred for genetic testing, but in 2013 only 66% completed counseling and 61% were tested. After a GC was embedded in the clinic in 2014, more than 80% of referred women completed counseling and germline genetic testing. Time to genetic counseling also decreased from a median of 107 to 40 days, irrespective of age and cancer family history (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Embedding a GC into the workflow for ovarian cancer patients is an effective way of improving access to genetic counseling, testing rates, and the timeliness of testing.

Unexpected Pathogenic RET p.V804M Variant Leads to the Clinical Diagnosis and Management of Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND RET p.V804M is a known activating oncogenic variant that confers an increased risk for medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC). Based on age-specific penetrance, the American Thyroid Association (ATA) categorizes this variant as posing moderate risk. Therefore, ATA guidelines endorse prophylactic thyroidectomy for carriers in childhood (by age 5-10 years) or adulthood, or when the serum calcitonin level becomes elevated. The recommendation for thyroidectomy is increasingly controversial due to the recently reported low penetrance of the RET p.V804M variant in a large unbiased ascertainment cohort. CASE REPORT We describe the unexpected identification of this variant in a 62-year-old woman undergoing broad, multigene cancer panel testing for her personal and family history of breast cancer. There was no known family history of MTC. Biochemical screening prompted by the RET p.V804M result revealed a mildly elevated serum calcitonin. Pathology examination of her thyroidectomy specimen revealed multifocal medullary thyroid microcarcinoma; her sibling's prophylactic thyroidectomy after a RET p.V840M-positive result similarly revealed early-stage MTC. CONCLUSIONS This report demonstrates the value of genetic counseling, shared decision-making, cascade testing, and timely thyroidectomy in the management of a patient with an unexpected RET p.V804M result.