Novel BRCA1 and BRCA2 Tumor Test as Basis for Treatment Decisions and Referral for Genetic Counselling of Patients with Ovarian Carcinomas.

With the recent introduction of Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, a promising novel therapy has become available for ovarian carcinoma (OC) patients with inactivating BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations in their tumor. To select patients who may benefit from these treatments, assessment of the mutation status of BRCA1 and BRCA2 in the tumor is required. For reliable evaluation of germline and somatic mutations in these genes in DNA derived from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue, we have developed a single-molecule molecular inversion probe (smMIP)-based targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) approach. Our smMIP-based NGS approach provides analysis of both strands of the open reading frame of BRCA1 and BRCA2, enabling the discrimination between real variants and formalin-induced artefacts. The single molecule tag enables compilation of unique reads leading to a high analytical sensitivity and enabling assessment of the reliability of mutation-negative results. Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) and Methylation-specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MS-MLPA) were used to detect exon deletions of BRCA1 and methylation of the BRCA1 promoter, respectively. Here, we show that this combined approach allows the rapid and reliable detection of both germline and somatic aberrations affecting BRCA1 and BRCA2 in DNA derived from FFPE OCs, enabling improved hereditary cancer risk assessment and clinical treatment of ovarian cancer patients.

High Satisfaction and Low Distress in Breast Cancer Patients One Year after BRCA-Mutation Testing without Prior Face-to-Face Genetic Counseling.

According to standard practice following referral to clinical genetics, most high risk breast cancer (BC) patients in many countries receive face-to-face genetic counseling prior to BRCA-mutation testing (DNA-intake). We evaluated a novel format by prospective study: replacing the intake consultation with telephone, written and digital information sent home. Face-to-face counseling then followed BRCA-mutation testing (DNA-direct). One year after BRCA-result disclosure, 108 participants returned long-term follow-up questionnaires, of whom 59 (55 %) had previously chosen DNA-direct (intervention) versus DNA-intake (standard practice i.e., control: 45 %). Questionnaires assessed satisfaction and psychological distress. All participants were satisfied and 85 % of DNA-direct participants would choose this procedure again; 10 % would prefer DNA-intake and 5 % were undecided. In repeated measurements ANOVA, general distress (GHQ-12, p = 0.01) and BC-specific distress (IES-bc, p = 0.03) were lower in DNA-direct than DNA-intake at all time measurements. Heredity-specific distress (IES-her) did not differ significantly between groups. Multivariate regression analyses showed that choice of procedure did not significantly contribute to either general or heredity-specific distress. BC-specific distress (after BC diagnosis) did contribute to both general and heredity-specific distress. This suggests that higher distress scores reflected BC experience, rather than the type of genetic diagnostic procedure. In conclusion, the large majority of BC patients that used DNA-direct reported high satisfaction without increased distress both in the short term, and 1 year after conclusion of genetic testing.

DNA-testing for BRCA1/2 prior to genetic counselling in patients with breast cancer: design of an intervention study, DNA-direct.

BACKGROUND: Current practice for patients with breast cancer referred for genetic counseling, includes face-to-face consultations with a genetic counselor prior to and following DNA-testing. This is based on guidelines regarding Huntington's disease in anticipation of high psychosocial impact of DNA-testing for mutations in BRCA1/2 genes. The initial consultation covers generic information regarding hereditary breast cancer and the (im)possibilities of DNA-testing, prior to such testing. Patients with breast cancer may see this information as irrelevant or unnecessary because individual genetic advice depends on DNA-test results. Also, verbal information is not always remembered well by patients. A different format for this information prior to DNA-testing is possible: replacing initial face-to-face genetic counseling (DNA-intake procedure) by telephone, written and digital information sent to patients' homes (DNA-direct procedure). METHODS/DESIGN: In this intervention study, 150 patients with breast cancer referred to the department of Clinical Genetics of the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre are given the choice between two procedures, DNA-direct (intervention group) or DNA-intake (usual care, control group). During a triage telephone call, patients are excluded if they have problems with Dutch text, family communication, or of psychological or psychiatric nature. Primary outcome measures are satisfaction and psychological distress. Secondary outcome measures are determinants for the participant's choice of procedure, waiting and processing times, and family characteristics. Data are collected by self-report questionnaires at baseline and following completion of genetic counseling. A minority of participants will receive an invitation for a 30 min semi-structured telephone interview, e.g. confirmed carriers of a BRCA1/2 mutation, and those who report problems with the procedure. DISCUSSION: This study compares current practice of an intake consultation (DNA-intake) to a home informational package of telephone, written and digital information (DNA-direct) prior to DNA-testing in patients with breast cancer. The aim is to determine whether DNA-direct is an acceptable procedure for BRCA1/2 testing, in order to provide customized care to patients with breast cancer, cutting down on the period of uncertainty during this diagnostic process.

Universal Tumor DNA BRCA1/2 Testing of Ovarian Cancer: Prescreening PARPi Treatment and Genetic Predisposition.

BACKGROUND: Women with epithelial ovarian cancer (OC) have a higher chance to benefit from poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) therapy if their tumor has a somatic or hereditary BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant. Current guidelines advise BRCA1/2 genetic predisposition testing for all OC patients, though this does not detect somatic variants. We assessed the feasibility of a workflow for universal tumor DNA BRCA1/2 testing of all newly diagnosed OC patients as a prescreen for PARPi treatment and cancer predisposition testing. METHODS: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue was obtained from OC patients in seven hospitals immediately after diagnosis or primary surgery. DNA was extracted, and universal tumor BRCA1/2 testing was then performed in a single site. Diagnostic yield, uptake, referral rates for genetic predisposition testing, and experiences of patients and gynecologists were evaluated. RESULTS: Tumor BRCA1/2 testing was performed for 315 (77.6%) of the 406 eligible OC samples, of which 305 (96.8%) were successful. In 51 of these patients, pathogenic variants were detected (16.7%). Most patients (88.2%) went on to have a genetic predisposition test. BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants were shown to be hereditary in 56.8% and somatic in 43.2% of patients. Participating gynecologists and patients were overwhelmingly positive about the workflow. CONCLUSIONS: Universal tumor BRCA1/2 testing in all newly diagnosed OC patients is feasible, effective, and appreciated by patients and gynecologists. Because many variants cannot be detected in DNA from blood, testing tumor DNA as the first step can double the identification rate of patients who stand to benefit most from PARP inhibitors.

Stopping ovarian cancer screening in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: effects on risk management decisions & outcome of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy specimens.

OBJECTIVE: Ovarian cancer screening (OCS) for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers was stopped in our family cancer clinic in 2009 because of its ineffectiveness. The study objective was to investigate the effect of stopping OCS on the timing and uptake of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) and on the percentage of occult cancers in the specimens. METHODS: 419 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers were recruited between January 1999 and June 2013. Uptake, timing and the outcome of the RRSO specimens before stopping OCS (period I) were compared to those after stopping OCS (period II). RESULTS: The percentage of women undergoing RRSO within the recommended age range increased from 81% to 95%. Receiving DNA test results in period II independently predicted a shorter time interval to RRSO (hazard ratio: 2.48, 95% confidence interval: 1.81-3.39). The incidence of detecting occult cancers in RRSO specimens before and after stopping OCS was 1.3% and 1.8%, respectively, and was not statistically significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: The presentation of risk management options to women may influence their decision. The increased patient awareness of the ineffectiveness of OCS could have led to a higher percentage of women undergoing RRSO and doing so more often within the recommended age range.

More breast cancer patients prefer BRCA-mutation testing without prior face-to-face genetic counseling.

Currently, most breast cancer (BC) patients receive face-to-face genetic counseling (DNA-intake) prior to BRCA-mutation testing, with generic information regarding hereditary BC and BRCA-mutation testing. This prospective study evaluated a novel format: replacing the intake consultation with telephone, written and digital information sent home, and face-to-face contact following BRCA-mutation testing (DNA-direct). From August 2011 to February 2012, 161 of 233 eligible BC patients referred to our Human Genetics department chose between DNA-direct (intervention) or DNA-intake (control). Exclusion criteria were psychological problems (n = 33), difficulty with Dutch text (n = 5), known BRCA-family (n = 3), non-BRCA-referral (n = 1). 30 declined genetic counseling or study participation. Participants received questionnaires including satisfaction and psychological distress. 59 % chose DNA-direct (p = 0.03), of whom 90 % were satisfied and would choose DNA-direct again (including 6/8 BRCA-mutation carriers); although 27 % hesitated to recommend DNA-direct to other patients. General distress (GHQ-12, p = 0.001) and heredity-specific distress (IES, p = 0.02) scored lower in DNA-direct than DNA-intake, both at baseline and follow-up 2 weeks after BRCA-result disclosure; all scores remained below clinical relevance. DNA-direct participants reported higher website use (53 vs. 32 %, p = 0.01), more referrer information about personal consequences (41 vs. 20 %, p = 0.004) and lower decisional conflict (median 20 [0-88] vs. 25 [0-50], p = 0.01). Processing time in DNA-direct was reduced by 1 month. Mutation detection rate was 8 % in both groups. All BRCA-mutation carriers fulfilled current testing criteria. In conclusion, more BC patients preferred DNA-direct over intake consultation prior to BRCA-mutation testing, the majority being strongly to moderately satisfied with the procedure followed, without increased distress.

Can we test for hereditary cancer at 18 years when we start surveillance at 25? Patient reported outcomes.

DNA-testing for BRCA1/2 or Lynch syndrome is possible from the age of 18 years, although surveillance usually starts at 25. Some patients regret their decision of testing before age 25. This retrospective study evaluates whether the testing age should be above 25 years to prevent adverse effects such as regret or decisional conflict, by determining the percentage and characteristics of patients reporting these problems. 111 of 219 patients (51%) tested for BRCA1/2 mutations or Lynch syndrome between 18 and 25 years from July 1996 to February 2011, returned self-report surveys. Primary measures were regret, decisional conflict and family influence. Secondary measures included quality of life (QoL), coping style, impact of genetic testing, and risk perception. Median age was 27 [21-40] years, with 86% female. 73% was tested for BRCA1/2, 27% for Lynch syndrome. Only 3% reported regret, however 39% had moderate (32%) to severe (7%) decisional conflict. Regression analysis revealed that decisional conflict was associated with more monitoring/neutral coping style (p < 0.03) or paternal/no family mutation (p < 0.02); there were no differences in QoL, impact or risk perception. 42% were mutation carriers, showing equal decisional conflict to non-carriers. 68% would recommend testing <25 years; 77% desired surveillance <25 years if a mutation carrier. Almost no patient tested for hereditary cancer between 18 and 25 years regretted this decision. A third reported retrospective decisional conflict, especially those actively seeking information when faced with a threat and/or those with a paternal or unknown inheritance. These patients may benefit from decisional support and personalized information.