The psychological impact of undergoing genetic-risk profiling in men with a family history of prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: The ability to identify men at genetically high-risk of prostate cancer (PrCa) would enable screening to be targeted at those most in need. This study explored the psychological impact (in terms of general and PrCa-specific worry and risk perceptions) on men with a family history of PrCa, undergoing prostate screening and genetic-risk profiling, within a research study. METHODS: A prospective exploratory approach was adopted, incorporating a sequential mixed-method design. Questionnaires were completed at two time points to measure the impact of undergoing screening and genetic-risk profiling. In-depth interviews were completed in a subgroup after all study procedures were completed and analysed using a framework approach. RESULTS: Ninety-five men completed both questionnaires, and 26 were interviewed. No measurable psychological distress was detectable in the group as a whole. The interview findings fell into two categories: 'feeling at risk' and 'living with risk'. The feeling of being at risk of PrCa is a part of men's lives, shaped by assumptions and information gathered over many years. Men used this information to communicate about PrCa risk to their peers. Men overestimate their risk of PrCa and have an innate assumption that they will develop PrCa. The interviews revealed that men experienced acute anxiety when waiting for screening results. CONCLUSIONS: Personalised genetic-risk assessments do not prevent men from overestimating their risk of PrCa. Screening anxiety is common, and timeframes for receiving results should be kept to a minimum. Methods of risk communication in men at risk of PrCa should be the subject of future research.

A risk prediction algorithm based on family history and common genetic variants: application to prostate cancer with potential clinical impact.

Genome wide association studies have identified several single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that are independently associated with small increments in risk of prostate cancer, opening up the possibility for using such variants in risk prediction. Using segregation analysis of population-based samples of 4,390 families of prostate cancer patients from the UK and Australia, and assuming all familial aggregation has genetic causes, we previously found that the best model for the genetic susceptibility to prostate cancer was a mixed model of inheritance that included both a recessive major gene component and a polygenic component (P) that represents the effect of a large number of genetic variants each of small effect, where . Based on published studies of 26 SNPs that are currently known to be associated with prostate cancer, we have extended our model to incorporate these SNPs by decomposing the polygenic component into two parts: a polygenic component due to the known susceptibility SNPs, , and the residual polygenic component due to the postulated but as yet unknown genetic variants, . The resulting algorithm can be used for predicting the probability of developing prostate cancer in the future based on both SNP profiles and explicit family history information. This approach can be applied to other diseases for which population-based family data and established risk variants exist.

Prostate cancer segregation analyses using 4390 families from UK and Australian population-based studies.

Familial aggregation of prostate cancer is likely to be due to multiple susceptibility loci, perhaps acting in conjunction with shared lifestyle risk factors. Models that assume a single mode of inheritance may be unrealistic. We analyzed genetic models of susceptibility to prostate cancer using segregation analysis of occurrence in families ascertained through population-based series totaling 4390 incident cases. We investigated major gene models (dominant, recessive, general, X-linked), polygenic models, and mixed models of susceptibility using the pedigree analysis software MENDEL. The hypergeometric model was used to approximate polygenic inheritance. The best-fitting model for the familial aggregation of prostate cancer was the mixed recessive model. The frequency of the susceptibility allele in the population was estimated to be 0.15 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11-0.20), with a relative risk for homozygote carriers of 94 (95% CI 46-192), and a polygenic standard deviation of 2.01 (95% CI 1.72-2.34). These analyses suggest that one or more genes having a strong recessively inherited effect on risk, as well as a number of genes with variants having small multiplicative effects on risk, may account for the genetic susceptibility to prostate cancer. The recessive component would predict the observed higher familial risk for siblings of cases than for fathers, but this could also be due to other factors such as shared lifestyle by siblings, targeted screening effects, and/or non-additive effects of one or more genes.

Identification of new genetic risk factors for prostate cancer.

There is evidence that a substantial part of genetic predisposition to prostate cancer (PCa) may be due to lower penetrance genes which are found by genome-wide association studies. We have recently conducted such a study and seven new regions of the genome linked to PCa risk have been identified. Three of these loci contain candidate susceptibility genes: MSMB, LMTK2 and KLK2/3. The MSMB and KLK2/3 genes may be useful for PCa screening, and the LMTK2 gene might provide a potential therapeutic target. Together with results from other groups, there are now 23 germline genetic variants which have been reported. These results have the potential to be developed into a genetic test. However, we consider that marketing of tests to the public is premature, as PCa risk can not be evaluated fully at this stage and the appropriate screening protocols need to be developed. Follow-up validation studies, as well as studies to explore the psychological implications of genetic profile testing, will be vital prior to roll out into healthcare.

Late toxicity is not increased in BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers undergoing breast radiotherapy in the United Kingdom.

PURPOSE: To undertake the first substantial clinical study of breast radiotherapy toxicity in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers in the United Kingdom. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Acute and late radiation effects were evaluated in a retrospective study of 55 BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers treated with radiotherapy for breast cancer at four centers between 1983 and 2002. Individual matching with controls who had sporadic breast cancer was undertaken for age at diagnosis, time since completion of radiation, and treatment variables. Detailed assessments were undertaken by one examiner. Median follow-up was 6.75 years for carriers and 7.75 years for controls. Rates of late events (rib fractures, lung fibrosis, necrosis of soft tissue/bone, and pericarditis) as well as LENT-SOMA scores and clinical photography scores of breast size, shape, and skin telangiectasia were the primary end points. RESULTS: No increase in clinically significant late toxicity was seen in the mutation carriers. CONCLUSIONS: These data add substantial weight to the evidence that the outcomes in the treated breast from radiotherapy in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations are comparable with those in women with sporadic breast cancer.

Acute chemotherapy-related toxicity is not increased in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers treated for breast cancer in the United Kingdom.

PURPOSE: To evaluate acute toxicity induced by chemotherapy for breast cancer in a retrospective study of 62 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers matched 1:1 with women who had treatment for sporadic disease in the United Kingdom between 1983 and 2003. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: All participants were interviewed by one of two researchers using standardized questionnaires, and their medical records were reviewed by one research nurse. The two main regimens received were cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil and fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide. The proportion of cases and controls receiving anthracycline-based treatment was equivalent, but fewer BRCA1 cases received this treatment than did BRCA2 mutation carriers. Toxicity was documented using the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Common Toxicity Criteria for hematologic, infective, and gastrointestinal toxicities. No increase in toxicity was seen in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. RESULTS: The only significant difference was that neutropenia was less evident in BRCA2 mutation carriers than in either BRCA1 mutation carriers or controls. As a result, there was no requirement for dose reduction among BRCA2 mutation carriers, in contrast to 10 of 39 BRCA1 carriers and 16 of 62 controls (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This result has implications for therapy and indicates that women with mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 may be given the same doses of chemotherapy as noncarriers.

Cancer genetics: the importance of obtaining a family history.

Cancer genetics is a rapidly evolving field that is becoming an integral part of a cancer patient's care. Until recently little genetics had been taught in the nursing curricula but a recent drive by the Department of Health is resulting in the integration of genetics into nurse training.

BRCA1/2 predictive testing: a study of uptake in two centres.

Differences in reported uptake of genetic testing for mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 can largely be accounted for by different methodologies and by studying research vs nonresearch families. In our joint study of 75 nonresearch families from two UK centres in which at least 3 years had elapsed since the initial proband had been informed of the availability of testing, only 45 and 34% of eligible individuals from Manchester and London, respectively, had come forward for counselling. Final uptake rates using a non-proactive approach were 53 and 29% for women and 11-12% for men, but the figure among those attending clinic was 73 and 62%, respectively. Unlike previous studies, we did not find that uptake had stabilised after a year with 25% of those being tested more than 2 years after the family was informed, and several delaying a considerable time between genetics appointments. We believe that the particularly low uptake even of counselling in men may need to be addressed by improving family communication or providing information sheets for family members to disseminate.

Genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer predisposition: cancer burden and responsibility.

The purpose of this study was to explore experiences of cancer in the family and motivation for predictive genetic testing among women at increased risk of developing breast and/or ovarian cancer due to their family history. Fifteen women were interviewed prior to receiving their genetic test results. A grounded theory approach was adopted to analyse the interview transcripts. The findings indicated that experiences of cancer in the family play an important role in formulating beliefs about one's own risk and motivation for predictive genetic testing. A sense of responsibility for one's own health and the need to take action either to prevent cancer or detect cancer at as early a stage as possible, as well as a feeling of responsibility towards children and other family members was apparent. The findings raise the question of whether there is any real choice available to these women and whether there is a negative impact on family dynamics.

"It's all very well reading the letters in the genome, but it's a long way to being able to write": Men's interpretations of undergoing genetic profiling to determine future risk of prostate cancer.

A family history of prostate cancer (PC) is one of the main risk factors for the disease. A number of common single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that confer small but cumulatively substantial risks of PC have been identified, opening the possibility for the use of SNPs in PC risk stratification for targeted screening and prevention in the future. The objective of this study was to explore the psychosocial impact of receiving information about genetic risk of PC. The participants were men who had a family history of PC and were enrolled in a screening study providing research genetic profiling alongside screening for PC. A combination of questionnaires and in-depth interviews were used. Questionnaires were completed by men at two time points: both before and after joining the study and going through the genetic profiling process. The interviews were completed after all study process were complete and were analysed using a framework analysis. In total 95 men completed both questionnaires and 26 men were interviewed. A number of issues facing men at risk of PC were identified. The results fell into two main categories: personal relevance and societal relevance. The strength of men's innate beliefs about their risk, shaped by genetic and environmental assumptions, outweigh the information provided by genetic testing. Men felt genetic profile results would have future use for accessing prostate screening, being aware of symptoms and in communicating with others. The findings reinforce the importance of providing contextual information alongside genetic profiling test results, and emphasises the importance of the counselling process in providing genetic risk information. This research raises some key issues to facilitate clinical practice and future research related to the use of genetic profiling to determine risk of PC and other diseases.

Germline BRCA mutations are associated with higher risk of nodal involvement, distant metastasis, and poor survival outcomes in prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To analyze the baseline clinicopathologic characteristics of prostate tumors with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutations and the prognostic value of those mutations on prostate cancer (PCa) outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study analyzed the tumor features and outcomes of 2,019 patients with PCa (18 BRCA1 carriers, 61 BRCA2 carriers, and 1,940 noncarriers). The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate the associations between BRCA1/2 status and other PCa prognostic factors with overall survival (OS), cause-specific OS (CSS), CSS in localized PCa (CSS_M0), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and CSS from metastasis (CSS_M1). RESULTS: PCa with germline BRCA1/2 mutations were more frequently associated with Gleason ≥ 8 (P = .00003), T3/T4 stage (P = .003), nodal involvement (P = .00005), and metastases at diagnosis (P = .005) than PCa in noncarriers. CSS was significantly longer in noncarriers than in carriers (15.7 v 8.6 years, multivariable analyses [MVA] P = .015; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.8). For localized PCa, 5-year CSS and MFS were significantly higher in noncarriers (96% v 82%; MVA P = .01; HR = 2.6%; and 93% v 77%; MVA P = .009; HR = 2.7, respectively). Subgroup analyses confirmed the poor outcomes in BRCA2 patients, whereas the role of BRCA1 was not well defined due to the limited size and follow-up in this subgroup. CONCLUSION: Our results confirm that BRCA1/2 mutations confer a more aggressive PCa phenotype with a higher probability of nodal involvement and distant metastasis. BRCA mutations are associated with poor survival outcomes and this should be considered for tailoring clinical management of these patients.

Ownership of uncertainty: healthcare professionals counseling and treating women from hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families who receive an inconclusive BRCA1/2 genetic test result.

AIM: The aim of this study was to understand more fully how healthcare professionals deal with the uncertainty intrinsic in counseling and treating women from hereditary breast/ovarian cancer families who receive inconclusive BRCA1/2 genetic test results (genetic tests that do not find a mutation to account for the family history). METHODS: We conducted a small, qualitative, exploratory study using open-ended semistructured interviews of 12 geneticists, genetic counselor/nurses, oncologists, gynecologists, and breast surgeons at a major UK cancer center. We asked questions about how these professionals dealt with the large amount of uncertainty raised by an inconclusive result, how they communicated the uncertainty involved, their feelings about presenting medical management options based on information fraught with uncertainty, the role of the media, differences in perspectives by specialty, and personal feelings about the uncertainty. RESULTS: Based on themes generated by the data, we proposed the concept "ownership of uncertainty" (sole, shared, diffused, normalized, transferred) to explain how the professionals in this study dealt with this high degree of uncertainty. A shared ownership of uncertainty was the dominant model during the presentation of information given by the professionals as part of their consultation with their patients. However, the final decision for management was left primarily to the woman seeking advice, even though several of the professionals reported feeling uneasy about this. CONCLUSION: The concept "ownership of uncertainty" helps advance the understanding of how the healthcare professionals deal with the uncertainty intrinsic to an inconclusive BRCA1/2 genetic test result within the current social context.

Screening for ovarian cancer in women with varying levels of risk, using annual tests, results in high recall for repeat screening tests.

BACKGROUND: We assessed ovarian cancer screening outcomes in women with a positive family history of ovarian cancer divided into a low-, moderate- or high-risk group for development of ovarian cancer. METHODS: 545 women with a positive family history of ovarian cancer referred to the Ovarian Screening Service at the Royal Marsden Hospital, London from January 2000- December 2008 were included. They were stratified into three risk-groups according to family history (high-, moderate- and low-risk) of developing ovarian cancer and offered annual serum CA 125 and transvaginal ultrasound screening. The high-risk group was offered genetic testing. RESULTS: The median age at entry was 44 years. The number of women in the high, moderate and low-risk groups was 397, 112, and 36, respectively. During 2266 women years of follow-up two ovarian cancer cases were found: one advanced stage at her fourth annual screening, and one early stage at prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO). Prophylactic BSO was performed in 138 women (25.3%). Forty-three women had an abnormal CA125, resulting in 59 repeat tests. The re-call rate in the high, moderate and low-risk group was 14%, 3% and 6%. Equivocal transvaginal ultrasound results required 108 recalls in 71 women. The re-call rate in the high, moderate, and low-risk group was 25%, 6% and 17%. CONCLUSION: No early stage ovarian cancer was picked up at annual screening and a significant number of re-calls for repeat screening tests was identified.

Is no news good news? Inconclusive genetic test results in BRCA1 and BRCA2 from patients and professionals' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Women from families with a high risk of breast or ovarian cancer in which genetic testing for mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes is inconclusive are a vulnerable and understudied group. Furthermore, there are no studies of the professional specialists who treat them - geneticists, genetic counsellors/nurses, oncologists, gynaecologists and breast surgeons. METHODS: We conducted a small qualitative study that investigated women who had developed breast cancer under the age of 45 and who had an inconclusive BRCA1/2 genetic diagnostic test (where no mutations or unclassified variants were identified). We arranged three focus groups for affected women and their close female relatives - 13 women took part. We also interviewed 12 health professionals who were involved in the care of these women. RESULTS: The majority of the women had a good grasp of the meaning of their own or a family member's inconclusive result, but a few indicated some misunderstanding. Most of the women in this study underwent the test for the benefit of others in the family and none mentioned that they were having the test purely for themselves. A difficult issue for sisters of affected women was whether or not to undertake prophylactic breast surgery. The professionals were sensitive to the difficulties in explaining an inconclusive result. Some felt frustrated that technology had not as yet provided them with a better tool for prediction of risk. CONCLUSIONS: Some of the women were left with the dilemma of what decision to make regarding medical management of their cancer risk. For the most part, the professionals believed that the women should be supported in whatever management decisions they considered best, provided these decisions were based on a complete and accurate understanding of the genetic test that had taken place in the family.

Unusual presentation of Lynch Syndrome.

Lynch Syndrome/HNPCC is a syndrome of cancer predisposition linked to inherited mutations of genes participating in post-replicative DNA mismatch repair (MMR). The spectrum of cancer associated with Lynch Syndrome includes tumours of the colorectum, endometrium, ovary, upper gastrointestinal tract and the urothelium although other cancers are rarely described. We describe a family of Lynch Syndrome with an hMLH1 mutation, that harbours an unusual tumour spectrum and its diagnostic and management challenges.

Multiple loci on 8q24 associated with prostate cancer susceptibility.

Previous studies have identified multiple loci on 8q24 associated with prostate cancer risk. We performed a comprehensive analysis of SNP associations across 8q24 by genotyping tag SNPs in 5,504 prostate cancer cases and 5,834 controls. We confirmed associations at three previously reported loci and identified additional loci in two other linkage disequilibrium blocks (rs1006908: per-allele OR = 0.87, P = 7.9 x 10(-8); rs620861: OR = 0.90, P = 4.8 x 10(-8)). Eight SNPs in five linkage disequilibrium blocks were independently associated with prostate cancer susceptibility.

Identification of seven new prostate cancer susceptibility loci through a genome-wide association study.

Prostate cancer (PrCa) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in males in developed countries. To identify common PrCa susceptibility alleles, we previously conducted a genome-wide association study in which 541,129 SNPs were genotyped in 1,854 PrCa cases with clinically detected disease and in 1,894 controls. We have now extended the study to evaluate promising associations in a second stage in which we genotyped 43,671 SNPs in 3,650 PrCa cases and 3,940 controls and in a third stage involving an additional 16,229 cases and 14,821 controls from 21 studies. In addition to replicating previous associations, we identified seven new prostate cancer susceptibility loci on chromosomes 2, 4, 8, 11 and 22 (with P = 1.6 x 10(-8) to P = 2.7 x 10(-33)).

"BRCAness" syndrome in ovarian cancer: a case-control study describing the clinical features and outcome of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the clinical impact of germ-line BRCA1/2 mutations in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) on responses to first and subsequent lines of chemotherapy, treatment-free interval (TFI) between each line of therapy, and overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-two EOC patients with germ-line BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations (BRCA-positive) were selected from our database and matched (1:2) with 44 nonhereditary EOC controls (defined by no associated personal history of breast cancer and no family history of breast and ovarian cancer or an uninformative BRCA mutation test) for stage, histologic subtype, age, and year of diagnosis. All patients received primary platinum-based chemotherapy. Statistical comparisons included responses after first-, second-, and third-line treatment (chi(2)/Fisher's exact test) and median OS (Kaplan-Meier method/log-rank test). RESULTS: Compared with controls, BRCA-positive patients had higher overall (95.5% v 59.1%; P = .002) and complete response rates (81.8% v 43.2%; P = .004) to first line treatment, higher responses to second and third line platinum-based chemotherapy (second line, 91.7% v 40.9% [P = .004]; third line, 100% v 14.3% [P = .005]) and longer TFIs. A significant improvement in median OS in BRCA-positive patients compared with controls was observed from both time of diagnosis (8.4 v 2.9 years; P < .002) and time of first relapse (5 v 1.6 years; P < .001). BRCA status, stage, and length of first response were independent prognostic factors from time of first relapse. CONCLUSION: BRCA-positive EOC patients have better outcomes than nonhereditary EOC patients. There exists a clinical syndrome of BRCAness that includes serous histology, high response rates to first and subsequent lines of platinum-based treatment, longer TFIs between relapses, and improved OS.

Multiple newly identified loci associated with prostate cancer susceptibility.

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer affecting males in developed countries. It shows consistent evidence of familial aggregation, but the causes of this aggregation are mostly unknown. To identify common alleles associated with prostate cancer risk, we conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) using blood DNA samples from 1,854 individuals with clinically detected prostate cancer diagnosed at

Multiple loci with different cancer specificities within the 8q24 gene desert.

Recent studies based on genome-wide association, linkage, and admixture scan analysis have reported associations of various genetic variants in 8q24 with susceptibility to breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer. This locus lies within a 1.18-Mb region that contains no known genes but is bounded at its centromeric end by FAM84B and at its telomeric end by c-MYC, two candidate cancer susceptibility genes. To investigate the associations of specific loci within 8q24 with specific cancers, we genotyped the nine previously reported cancer-associated single-nucleotide polymorphisms across the region in four case-control sets of prostate (1854 case subjects and 1894 control subjects), breast (2270 case subjects and 2280 control subjects), colorectal (2299 case subjects and 2284 control subjects), and ovarian (1975 case subjects and 3411 control subjects) cancer. Five different haplotype blocks within this gene desert were specifically associated with risks of different cancers. One block was solely associated with risk of breast cancer, three others were associated solely with the risk of prostate cancer, and a fifth was associated with the risk of prostate, colorectal, and ovarian cancer, but not breast cancer. We conclude that there are at least five separate functional variants in this region.