Interpreting and integrating genomic tests results in clinical cancer care: Overview and practical guidance.

The last decade has seen rapid progress in the use of genomic tests, including gene panels, whole-exome sequencing, and whole-genome sequencing, in research and clinical cancer care. These advances have created expansive opportunities to characterize the molecular attributes of cancer, revealing a subset of cancer-associated aberrations called driver mutations. The identification of these driver mutations can unearth vulnerabilities of cancer cells to targeted therapeutics, which has led to the development and approval of novel diagnostics and personalized interventions in various malignancies. The applications of this modern approach, often referred to as precision oncology or precision cancer medicine, are already becoming a staple in cancer care and will expand exponentially over the coming years. Although genomic tests can lead to better outcomes by informing cancer risk, prognosis, and therapeutic selection, they remain underutilized in routine cancer care. A contributing factor is a lack of understanding of their clinical utility and the difficulty of results interpretation by the broad oncology community. Practical guidelines on how to interpret and integrate genomic information in the clinical setting, addressed to clinicians without expertise in cancer genomics, are currently limited. Building upon the genomic foundations of cancer and the concept of precision oncology, the authors have developed practical guidance to aid the interpretation of genomic test results that help inform clinical decision making for patients with cancer. They also discuss the challenges that prevent the wider implementation of precision oncology.

Evidence-based recommendations for gene-specific ACMG/AMP variant classification from the ClinGen ENIGMA BRCA1 and BRCA2 Variant Curation Expert Panel.

The ENIGMA research consortium develops and applies methods to determine clinical significance of variants in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genes. An ENIGMA BRCA1/2 classification sub-group, formed in 2015 as a ClinGen external expert panel, evolved into a ClinGen internal Variant Curation Expert Panel (VCEP) to align with Food and Drug Administration recognized processes for ClinVar contributions. The VCEP reviewed American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association of Molecular Pathology (ACMG/AMP) classification criteria for relevance to interpreting BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants. Statistical methods were used to calibrate evidence strength for different data types. Pilot specifications were tested on 40 variants and documentation revised for clarity and ease of use. The original criterion descriptions for 13 evidence codes were considered non-applicable or overlapping with other criteria. Scenario of use was extended or re-purposed for eight codes. Extensive analysis and/or data review informed specification descriptions and weights for all codes. Specifications were applied to pilot variants with pre-existing ClinVar classification as follows: 13 uncertain significance or conflicting, 14 pathogenic and/or likely pathogenic, and 13 benign and/or likely benign. Review resolved classification for 11/13 uncertain significance or conflicting variants and retained or improved confidence in classification for the remaining variants. Alignment of pre-existing ENIGMA research classification processes with ACMG/AMP classification guidelines highlighted several gaps in the research processes and the baseline ACMG/AMP criteria. Calibration of evidence strength was key to justify utility and strength of different data types for gene-specific application. The gene-specific criteria demonstrated value for improving ACMG/AMP-aligned classification of BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants.

Germline MBD4 deficiency causes a multi-tumor predisposition syndrome.

We report an autosomal recessive, multi-organ tumor predisposition syndrome, caused by bi-allelic loss-of-function germline variants in the base excision repair (BER) gene MBD4. We identified five individuals with bi-allelic MBD4 variants within four families and these individuals had a personal and/or family history of adenomatous colorectal polyposis, acute myeloid leukemia, and uveal melanoma. MBD4 encodes a glycosylase involved in repair of G:T mismatches resulting from deamination of 5'-methylcytosine. The colorectal adenomas from MBD4-deficient individuals showed a mutator phenotype attributable to mutational signature SBS1, consistent with the function of MBD4. MBD4-deficient polyps harbored somatic mutations in similar driver genes to sporadic colorectal tumors, although AMER1 mutations were more common and KRAS mutations less frequent. Our findings expand the role of BER deficiencies in tumor predisposition. Inclusion of MBD4 in genetic testing for polyposis and multi-tumor phenotypes is warranted to improve disease management.

Genetic predisposition to mosaic Y chromosome loss in blood.

Mosaic loss of chromosome Y (LOY) in circulating white blood cells is the most common form of clonal mosaicism1-5, yet our knowledge of the causes and consequences of this is limited. Here, using a computational approach, we estimate that 20% of the male population represented in the UK Biobank study (n = 205,011) has detectable LOY. We identify 156 autosomal genetic determinants of LOY, which we replicate in 757,114 men of European and Japanese ancestry. These loci highlight genes that are involved in cell-cycle regulation and cancer susceptibility, as well as somatic drivers of tumour growth and targets of cancer therapy. We demonstrate that genetic susceptibility to LOY is associated with non-haematological effects on health in both men and women, which supports the hypothesis that clonal haematopoiesis is a biomarker of genomic instability in other tissues. Single-cell RNA sequencing identifies dysregulated expression of autosomal genes in leukocytes with LOY and provides insights into why clonal expansion of these cells may occur. Collectively, these data highlight the value of studying clonal mosaicism to uncover fundamental mechanisms that underlie cancer and other ageing-related diseases.

Recommendations for laboratory workflow that better support centralised amalgamation of genomic variant data: findings from CanVIG-UK national molecular laboratory survey.

BACKGROUND: National and international amalgamation of genomic data offers opportunity for research and audit, including analyses enabling improved classification of variants of uncertain significance. Review of individual-level data from National Health Service (NHS) testing of cancer susceptibility genes (2002-2023) submitted to the National Disease Registration Service revealed heterogeneity across participating laboratories regarding (1) the structure, quality and completeness of submitted data, and (2) the ease with which that data could be assembled locally for submission. METHODS: In May 2023, we undertook a closed online survey of 51 clinical scientists who provided consensus responses representing all 17 of 17 NHS molecular genetic laboratories in England and Wales which undertake NHS diagnostic analyses of cancer susceptibility genes. The survey included 18 questions relating to 'next-generation sequencing workflow' (11), 'variant classification' (3) and 'phenotypical context' (4). RESULTS: Widely differing processes were reported for transfer of variant data into their local LIMS (Laboratory Information Management System), for the formatting in which the variants are stored in the LIMS and which classes of variants are retained in the local LIMS. Differing local provisions and workflow for variant classifications were also reported, including the resources provided and the mechanisms by which classifications are stored. CONCLUSION: The survey responses illustrate heterogeneous laboratory workflow for preparation of genomic variant data from local LIMS for centralised submission. Workflow is often labour-intensive and inefficient, involving multiple manual steps which introduce opportunities for error. These survey findings and adoption of the concomitant recommendations may support improvement in laboratory dataflows, better facilitating submission of data for central amalgamation.

Joint ABS-UKCGG-CanGene-CanVar consensus regarding the use of CanRisk in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: The CanRisk tool, which operationalises the Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) is used by Clinical Geneticists, Genetic Counsellors, Breast Oncologists, Surgeons and Family History Nurses for breast cancer risk assessments both nationally and internationally. There are currently no guidelines with respect to the day-to-day clinical application of CanRisk and differing inputs to the model can result in different recommendations for practice. METHODS: To address this gap, the UK Cancer Genetics Group in collaboration with the Association of Breast Surgery and the CanGene-CanVar programme held a workshop on 16th of May 2023, with the aim of establishing best practice guidelines. RESULTS: Using a pre-workshop survey followed by structured discussion and in-meeting polling, we achieved consensus for UK best practice in use of CanRisk in making recommendations for breast cancer surveillance, eligibility for genetic testing and the input of available information to undertake an individualised risk assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst consensus recommendations were achieved, the meeting highlighted some of the barriers limiting the use of CanRisk in clinical practice and identified areas that require further work and collaboration with relevant national bodies and policy makers to incorporate wider use of CanRisk into routine breast cancer risk assessments.

The impact of risk stratification by polygenic risk and age on breast cancer screening in women aged 40-49 years: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Polygenic Risk Scores (PRSs) have been proposed as a mechanism for risk-stratification of screening, increasing efficiency and enabling extension of existing programmes to improve survival in our aging population. We sought to model the impact of three hypothetical programmes of annual breast cancer screening in women aged 40-49 years: screening the PRS-defined high-risk quintile, screening the oldest quintile, and screening the full population. METHODS: In this UK-based modelling study, we used the published estimate of the area under the curve (AUC) of a currently available breast cancer PRS (0·64) to calculate the proportion of cancers captured by the PRS-defined high-risk quintile. We used population size estimates from the Office for National Statistics alongside age-stratified incidence rates of breast cancer, and age or stage-specific survival data from the National Cancer Registry, to build our model. We used stage-specific route-to-diagnosis data to reassign stage-specific survival for screen-detected cancers. Ethics approval was not required. FINDINGS: The PRS-defined high-risk quintile, oldest quintile, and full population capture 37% (n=2811), 29% (n=2198), and 100% (n=7533) of breast cancers occurring in women aged 40-49 each year. Annual screening of each group using digital mammography (sensitivity 70%, specificity 92%) would identify 1968, 1538, and 5273 breast cancers per year, respectively. This corresponds to an improvement in survival of 1·4% (102 deaths averted), 1·1% (80 deaths averted) and 3·6% (274 deaths averted) compared with baseline (no screening). Full population screening would require 4 369 703 mammograms and 354 246 confirmatory tests (breast biopsies) every year, while screening the oldest quintile would require 937 850 mammograms and 76 390 biopsies. Screening the PRS-defined high-risk quintile would require 873 941 mammograms and 71 658 biopsies, in addition to a PRS for all women in the age group (4 369 703). INTERPRETATION: Under favourable assumptions, stratifying screening by PRS rather than age results in modest gains in survival but increases overdiagnoses, logistical complexity, and economic costs. Our study is limited by our modelling parameters (anticipated to maximise survival estimates), including complete uptake of PRS profiling and cancer screening, no interval cancers, and application of screening tools superior to those currently available in the UK. Only with randomised controlled trials, can the uptake, clinical impact, costs, and harms of PRS-stratified screening be definitively assessed. FUNDING: The Wellcome Trust.

Long-term outcomes of hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to provide an up-to-date systematic review of "the long-term outcomes of bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy at the time of hysterectomy" and perform a meta-analysis for the reported associations. DATA SOURCES: Our study updated a previous systematic review by searching the literature using PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase for publications between January 2015 and August 2022. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Our study included studies of women who had a hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy vs women who had a hysterectomy with ovarian conservation or no surgery. METHODS: The quality of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations. Adjusted hazard ratios were extracted and combined to obtain fixed effect estimates. RESULTS: Compared with hysterectomy or no surgery, hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in young women was associated with decreased risk of breast cancer (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.84) but with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.47). In addition, it was associated with an increased risk of total cardiovascular diseases, coronary heart disease, and stroke with hazard ratios of 1.18 (95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.25), 1.17 (95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.25), and 1.20 (95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.31), respectively. Compared with no surgery, hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy before the age of 50 years was associated with an increased risk of hyperlipidemia (hazard ratio, 1.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-1.65), diabetes mellitus (hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.24), hypertension (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.20), dementia (hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-2.69), and depression (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-1.60). The evidence on the association with all-cause mortality in young women showed substantial heterogeneity between the studies (I2=85%; P<.01). CONCLUSION: Hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with multiple long-term outcomes. The benefits of the addition of bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy to hysterectomy should be balanced against the risks.

UK consensus recommendations for clinical management of cancer risk for women with germline pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes: RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1 and PALB2.

Germline pathogenic variants (GPVs) in the cancer predisposition genes BRCA1, BRCA2, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, BRIP1, PALB2, RAD51D and RAD51C are identified in approximately 15% of patients with ovarian cancer (OC). While there are clear guidelines around clinical management of cancer risk in patients with GPV in BRCA1, BRCA2, MLH1, MSH2 and MSH6, there are few guidelines on how to manage the more moderate OC risk in patients with GPV in BRIP1, PALB2, RAD51D and RAD51C, with clinical questions about appropriateness and timing of risk-reducing gynaecological surgery. Furthermore, while recognition of RAD51C and RAD51D as OC predisposition genes has been established for several years, an association with breast cancer (BC) has only more recently been described and clinical management of this risk has been unclear. With expansion of genetic testing of these genes to all patients with non-mucinous OC, new data on BC risk and improved estimates of OC risk, the UK Cancer Genetics Group and CanGene-CanVar project convened a 2-day meeting to reach a national consensus on clinical management of BRIP1, PALB2, RAD51D and RAD51C carriers in clinical practice. In this paper, we present a summary of the processes used to reach and agree on a consensus, as well as the key recommendations from the meeting.

UK recommendations for SDHA germline genetic testing and surveillance in clinical practice.

SDHA pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) are identified in up to 10% of patients with paraganglioma and phaeochromocytoma and up to 30% with wild-type gastrointestinal stromal tumours. Most SDHA PGV carriers present with an apparently sporadic tumour, but often the pathogenic variant has been inherited from parent who has the variant, but has not developed any clinical features. Studies of SDHA PGV carriers suggest that lifetime penetrance for SDHA-associated tumours is low, particularly when identified outside the context of a family history. Current recommended surveillance for SDHA PGV carriers follows an intensive protocol. With increasing implementation of tumour and germline large panel and whole-genome sequencing, it is likely more SDHA PGV carriers will be identified in patients with tumours not strongly associated with SDHA, or outside the context of a strong family history. This creates a complex situation about what to recommend in clinical practice considering low penetrance for tumour development, surveillance burden and patient anxiety. An expert SDHA working group was formed to discuss and consider this situation. This paper outlines the recommendations from this working group for testing and management of SDHA PGV carriers in clinical practice.

Utility of polygenic risk scores in UK cancer screening: a modelling analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is proposed that, through restriction to individuals delineated as high risk, polygenic risk scores (PRSs) might enable more efficient targeting of existing cancer screening programmes and enable extension into new age ranges and disease types. To address this proposition, we present an overview of the performance of PRS tools (ie, models and sets of single nucleotide polymorphisms) alongside harms and benefits of PRS-stratified cancer screening for eight example cancers (breast, prostate, colorectal, pancreas, ovary, kidney, lung, and testicular cancer). METHODS: For this modelling analysis, we used age-stratified cancer incidences for the UK population from the National Cancer Registration Dataset (2016-18) and published estimates of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for current, future, and optimised PRS for each of the eight cancer types. For each of five PRS-defined high-risk quantiles (ie, the top 50%, 20%, 10%, 5%, and 1%) and according to each of the three PRS tools (ie, current, future, and optimised) for the eight cancers, we calculated the relative proportion of cancers arising, the odds ratios of a cancer arising compared with the UK population average, and the lifetime cancer risk. We examined maximal attainable rates of cancer detection by age stratum from combining PRS-based stratification with cancer screening tools and modelled the maximal impact on cancer-specific survival of hypothetical new UK programmes of PRS-stratified screening. FINDINGS: The PRS-defined high-risk quintile (20%) of the population was estimated to capture 37% of breast cancer cases, 46% of prostate cancer cases, 34% of colorectal cancer cases, 29% of pancreatic cancer cases, 26% of ovarian cancer cases, 22% of renal cancer cases, 26% of lung cancer cases, and 47% of testicular cancer cases. Extending UK screening programmes to a PRS-defined high-risk quintile including people aged 40-49 years for breast cancer, 50-59 years for colorectal cancer, and 60-69 years for prostate cancer has the potential to avert, respectively, a maximum of 102, 188, and 158 deaths annually. Unstratified screening of the full population aged 48-49 years for breast cancer, 58-59 years for colorectal cancer, and 68-69 years for prostate cancer would use equivalent resources and avert, respectively, an estimated maximum of 80, 155, and 95 deaths annually. These maximal modelled numbers will be substantially attenuated by incomplete population uptake of PRS profiling and cancer screening, interval cancers, non-European ancestry, and other factors. INTERPRETATION: Under favourable assumptions, our modelling suggests modest potential efficiency gain in cancer case detection and deaths averted for hypothetical new PRS-stratified screening programmes for breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer. Restriction of screening to high-risk quantiles means many or most incident cancers will arise in those assigned as being low-risk. To quantify real-world clinical impact, costs, and harms, UK-specific cluster-randomised trials are required. FUNDING: The Wellcome Trust.

Risks of second non-breast primaries following breast cancer in women: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Second primary cancer incidence is rising among breast cancer survivors. We examined the risks of non-breast second primaries, in combination and at specific cancer sites, through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, seeking studies published by March 2022. We included studies that reported standardized incidence ratios (SIRs), with associated standard errors, assessing the combined risk of second non-breast primaries following breast cancer. We performed meta-analyses of combined second primary risks, stratifying by age, follow-up duration, and geographic region. We also assessed second primary risks at several specific sites, stratifying by age. The inverse variance method with DerSimonian-Laird estimators was used in all meta-analyses, assuming a random-effects model. Associated biases and study quality were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: One prospective and twenty-seven retrospective cohort studies were identified. SIRs for second non-breast primaries combined ranged from 0.84 to 1.84. The summary SIR estimate was 1.24 (95% CI 1.14-1.36, I2: 99%). This varied by age: the estimate was 1.59 (95% CI 1.36-1.85) when breast cancer was diagnosed before age 50, which was significantly higher than in women first diagnosed at 50 or over (SIR: 1.13, 95% CI 1.01-1.36, p for difference: < 0.001). SPC risks were also significantly higher when based on Asian, rather than European, registries (Asia-SIR: 1.47, 95% CI 1.29-1.67. Europe-SIR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.04-1.28). There were significantly increased risks of second thyroid (SIR: 1.89, 95% CI 1.49-2.38), corpus uteri (SIR: 1.84, 95% CI 1.53-2.23), ovary (SIR: 1.53, 95% CI 1.35-1.73), kidney (SIR: 1.43, 95% CI 1.17-1.73), oesophagus (SIR: 1.39, 95% CI 1.26-1.55), skin (melanoma) (SIR: 1.34, 95% CI 1.18-1.52), blood (leukaemia) (SIR: 1.30, 95% CI 1.17-1.45), lung (SIR: 1.25, 95% CI 1.03-1.51), stomach (SIR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.12-1.36) and bladder (SIR: 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.26) primaries. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer survivors are at significantly increased risk of second primaries at many sites. Risks are higher for those diagnosed with breast cancer before age 50 and in Asian breast cancer survivors compared to European breast cancer survivors. This study is limited by a lack of data on potentially confounding variables. The conclusions may inform clinical management decisions following breast cancer, although specific clinical recommendations lie outside the scope of this review.

Germline predisposition to haematological malignancies: Best practice consensus guidelines from the UK Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG), CanGene-CanVar and the NHS England Haematological Oncology Working Group.

The implementation of whole genome sequencing and large somatic gene panels in haematological malignancies is identifying an increasing number of individuals with either potential or confirmed germline predisposition to haematological malignancy. There are currently no national or international best practice guidelines with respect to management of carriers of such variants or of their at-risk relatives. To address this gap, the UK Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG), CanGene-CanVar and the NHS England Haematological Oncology Working Group held a workshop over two days on 28-29th April 2022, with the aim of establishing consensus guidelines on relevant clinical and laboratory pathways. The workshop focussed on the management of disease-causing germline variation in the following genes: DDX41, CEBPA, RUNX1, ANKRD26, ETV6, GATA2. Using a pre-workshop survey followed by structured discussion and in-meeting polling, we achieved consensus for UK best practice in several areas. In particular, high consensus was achieved on issues regarding standardised reporting, variant classification, multidisciplinary team working and patient support. The best practice recommendations from this meeting may be applicable to an expanding number of other genes in this setting.

Sebaceous carcinoma epidemiology, associated malignancies and Lynch/Muir-Torre syndrome screening in England from 2008 to 2018.

BACKGROUND: Sebaceous carcinomas (SC) may be associated with the cancer predisposition syndrome Muir-Torre/Lynch syndrome (MTS/LS), identifiable by SC mismatch repair (MMR) screening; however, there is limited data on MMR status of SC. OBJECTIVE: To describe the epidemiology of SC, copresentation of other cancers, and population level frequency of MMR screening in SC. METHODS: A population-based retrospective cohort study of SC patients in the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service in England. RESULTS: This study included 1077 SC cases (739 extraocular, 338 periocular). Age-standardized incidence rates (ASIR) were higher in men compared with women, 2.74 (95% CI, 2.52-9.69) per 1,000,000 person-years for men versus 1.47 person-years (95% CI, 1.4-1.62) for women. Of the patients, 19% (210/1077) developed at least one MTS/LS-associated malignancy. MMR immunohistochemical screening was performed in only 20% (220/1077) of SC tumors; of these, 32% (70/219) of tumors were MMR deficient. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective design. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of MMR screening into clinical practice guidelines for the management of SC will increase the opportunity for MTS/LS diagnoses, with implications for cancer surveillance, chemoprevention with aspirin, and immunotherapy treatment targeted to MTS/LS cancers.

A digital pathway for genetic testing in UK NHS patients with cancer: BRCA-DIRECT randomised study internal pilot.

BACKGROUND: Germline genetic testing affords multiple opportunities for women with breast cancer, however, current UK NHS models for delivery of germline genetic testing are clinician-intensive and only a minority of breast cancer cases access testing. METHODS: We designed a rapid, digital pathway, supported by a genetics specialist hotline, for delivery of germline testing of BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 (BRCA-testing), integrated into routine UK NHS breast cancer care. We piloted the pathway, as part of the larger BRCA-DIRECT study, in 130 unselected patients with breast cancer and gathered preliminary data from a randomised comparison of delivery of pretest information digitally (fully digital pathway) or via telephone consultation with a genetics professional (partially digital pathway). RESULTS: Uptake of genetic testing was 98.4%, with good satisfaction reported for both the fully and partially digital pathways. Similar outcomes were observed in both arms regarding patient knowledge score and anxiety, with <5% of patients contacting the genetics specialist hotline. All progression criteria established for continuation of the study were met. CONCLUSION: Pilot data indicate preliminary demonstration of feasibility and acceptability of a fully digital pathway for BRCA-testing and support proceeding to a full powered study for evaluation of non-inferiority of the fully digital pathway, detailed quantitative assessment of outcomes and operational economic analyses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN87845055.

Risk of developing a second primary cancer in male breast cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: With increasing survival after cancer diagnoses, second primary cancers (SPCs) are becoming more prevalent. We investigated the incidence and site of non-breast SPC risks following male breast cancer (BC). METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched for studies reporting standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) for SPCs published by March 2022. Meta-analyses used the generic inverse-variance method, assuming a random-effects model. We evaluated SIRs for overall SPCs, site-specific risks, by age at BC onset, time since BC onset and geographic region. We assessed study quality using routine techniques. RESULTS: Eight population-based retrospective cohort studies were identified. SIRs ranged from 1.05 to 2.17. The summary SIR estimate was 1.27 (95% CI: 1.03-1.56, I2: 86%), and there were increased colorectal (SIR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.03-1.61), pancreatic (SIR: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.05-2.55) and thyroid (SIR: 5.58, 95% CI: 1.04-30.05) SPC risks. When an outlying study was excluded, the summary SIR for men diagnosed with BC before age 50 was 1.50 (95% CI: 1.21-1.85), significantly higher than men diagnosed at older ages (SIR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.98-1.33). CONCLUSIONS: Male BC survivors are at elevated risks of developing second primary colorectal, pancreatic and thyroid cancers. The estimates may assist their clinical management and guide decisions on genetic testing.

Talking about Risk, UncertaintieS of Testing IN Genetics (TRUSTING): development and evaluation of an educational programme for healthcare professionals about BRCA1 & BRCA2 testing.

BACKGROUND: Mainstreaming of germline testing demands that all healthcare professionals have good communication skills, but few have genetic testing and counselling experience. We developed and evaluated educational workshops-Talking about Risk & UncertaintieS of Testing IN Genetics (TRUSTING). Contents included: presentations and exercises, an interview with a geneticist about BRCA testing, screening and prevention implications, filmed interactions between surgeons, a genetic counsellor and geneticists with a fictitious family (proband had a BRCA2 pathogenic variant with triple-negative breast cancer, her older sister-BRCA2 heterozygous, and cousin-negative for BRCA2 variant). METHODS: Twenty-one surgeons, 5 oncologists, 18 nurses and 9 genetic counsellors participated. Knowledge (18 item MCQ), communication skills (responses to 6 questions from proband and relatives) and self-confidence (discussing 9 genetic testing issues) were assessed pre- and post workshop. RESULTS: Knowledge scores improved significantly post workshop (mean change = 7.06; 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.37-7.74; P < 0.001), as did communication (mean change = 5.38; 95% CI 4.37-6.38; P < 0.001) and self-confidence (P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Healthcare professionals' knowledge and self-confidence when discussing the risks and uncertainties in genetics are often poor. TRUSTING workshops significantly enhanced attendees' navigation of communication difficulties encountered and will be rolled out more widely.

Quantifying prediction of pathogenicity for within-codon concordance (PM5) using 7541 functional classifications of BRCA1 and MSH2 missense variants.

PURPOSE: Conditions and thresholds applied for evidence weighting of within-codon concordance (PM5) for pathogenicity vary widely between laboratories and expert groups. Because of the sparseness of available clinical classifications, there is little evidence for variation in practice. METHODS: We used as a truthset 7541 dichotomous functional classifications of BRCA1 and MSH2, spanning 311 codons of BRCA1 and 918 codons of MSH2, generated from large-scale functional assays that have been shown to correlate excellently with clinical classifications. We assessed PM5 at 5 stringencies with incorporation of 8 in silico tools. For each analysis, we quantified a positive likelihood ratio (pLR, true positive rate/false positive rate), the predictive value of PM5-lookup in ClinVar compared with the functional truthset. RESULTS: pLR was 16.3 (10.6-24.9) for variants for which there was exactly 1 additional colocated deleterious variant on ClinVar, and the variant under examination was equally or more damaging when analyzed using BLOSUM62. pLR was 71.5 (37.8-135.3) for variants for which there were 2 or more colocated deleterious ClinVar variants, and the variant under examination was equally or more damaging than at least 1 colocated variant when analyzed using BLOSUM62. CONCLUSION: These analyses support the graded use of PM5, with potential to use it at higher evidence weighting where more stringent criteria are met.

Reclassification of clinically-detected sequence variants: Framework for genetic clinicians and clinical scientists by CanVIG-UK (Cancer Variant Interpretation Group UK).

PURPOSE: Variant classifications may change over time, driven by emergence of fresh or contradictory evidence or evolution in weighing or combination of evidence items. For variant classifications above the actionability threshold, which is classification of likely pathogenic or pathogenic, clinical actions may be irreversible, such as risk-reducing surgery or prenatal interventions. Variant reclassification up or down across the actionability threshold can therefore have significant clinical consequences. Laboratory approaches to variant reinterpretation and reclassification vary widely. METHODS: Cancer Variant Interpretation Group UK is a multidisciplinary network of clinical scientists and genetic clinicians from across the 24 Molecular Diagnostic Laboratories and Clinical Genetics Services of the United Kingdom (NHS) and Republic of Ireland. We undertook surveys, polls, and national meetings of Cancer Variant Interpretation Group UK to evaluate opinions about clinical and laboratory management regarding variant reclassification. RESULTS: We generated a consensus framework on variant reclassification applicable to cancer susceptibility genes and other clinical areas, which provides explicit recommendations for clinical and laboratory management of variant reclassification scenarios on the basis of the nature of the new evidence, the magnitude of evidence shift, and the final classification score. CONCLUSION: In this framework, clinical and laboratory resources are targeted for maximal clinical effect and minimal patient harm, as appropriate to all resource-constrained health care settings.

Quantifying evidence toward pathogenicity for rare phenotypes: The case of succinate dehydrogenase genes, SDHB and SDHD.

PURPOSE: The weight of the evidence to attach to observation of a novel rare missense variant in SDHB or SDHD in individuals with the rare neuroendocrine tumors, pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas (PCC/PGL), is uncertain. METHODS: We compared the frequency of SDHB and SDHD very rare missense variants (VRMVs) in 6328 and 5847 cases of PCC/PGL, respectively, with that of population controls to generate a pan-gene VRMV likelihood ratio (LR). Via windowing analysis, we measured regional enrichments of VRMVs to calculate the domain-specific VRMV-LR (DS-VRMV-LR). We also calculated subphenotypic LRs for variant pathogenicity for various clinical, histologic, and molecular features. RESULTS: We estimated the pan-gene VRMV-LR to be 76.2 (54.8-105.9) for SDHB and 14.8 (8.7-25.0) for SDHD. Clustering analysis revealed an SDHB enriched region (ɑɑ 177-260, P = .001) for which the DS-VRMV-LR was 127.2 (64.9-249.4) and an SDHD enriched region (ɑɑ 70-114, P = .000003) for which the DS-VRMV-LR was 33.9 (14.8-77.8). Subphenotypic LRs exceeded 6 for invasive disease (SDHB), head-and-neck disease (SDHD), multiple tumors (SDHD), family history of PCC/PGL, loss of SDHB staining on immunohistochemistry, and succinate-to-fumarate ratio >97 (SDHB, SDHD). CONCLUSION: Using methodology generalizable to other gene-phenotype dyads, the LRs relating to rarity and phenotypic specificity for a single observation in PCC/PGL of a SDHB/SDHD VRMV can afford substantial evidence toward pathogenicity.