Large, Prospective Analysis of the Reasons Patients Do Not Pursue BRCA Genetic Testing Following Genetic Counseling.

Genetic counseling (GC) and genetic testing (GT) identifies high-risk individuals who benefit from enhanced medical management. Not all individuals undergo GT following GC and understanding the reasons why can impact clinical efficiency, reduce GT costs through appropriate identification of high-risk individuals, and demonstrate the value of pre-GT GC. A collaborative project sponsored by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services prospectively collects anonymous data on BRCA-related GC visits performed by providers in Michigan, including demographics, patient/family cancer history, GT results, and reasons for declining GT. From 2008 to 2012, 10,726 patients underwent GC; 3476 (32.4%) did not pursue GT. Primary reasons included: not the best test candidate (28.1%), not clinically indicated (23.3%), and insurance/out of pocket cost concerns (13.6%). Patient disinterest was the primary reason for declining in 17.1%. Insurance/out of pocket cost concerns were the primary reason for not testing in 13.4% of untested individuals with private insurance. Among untested individuals with breast and/or ovarian cancer, 22.5% reported insurance/out of pocket cost concerns as the primary reason for not testing and 6.6% failed to meet Medicare criteria. In a five-year time period, nearly one-third of patients who underwent BRCA GC did not pursue GT. GT was not indicated in almost half of patients. Insurance/out of pocket cost concerns continue to be barriers.

To reflex or not: additional BRCA1/2 testing in Ashkenazi Jewish individuals without founder mutations.

This study determined the prevalence of non-Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA1/2 mutations in the Ashkenazi Jewish population in the state of Michigan, current provider testing practices, and the use of mutation probability models in determining which Ashkenazi Jewish individuals should be offered further analysis following negative BRCA1/2 founder testing. Testing patterns, mutation probabilities, and testing results were assessed for 327 Ashkenazi Jewish individuals seen for BRCA1/2 counseling in the state of Michigan who underwent testing for the Ashkenazi Jewish founder mutations. Only one (0.6 %) Ashkenazi Jewish individual with sequencing after negative founder analysis was found to have a non-founder mutation; no rearrangements were identified. Testing patterns varied by clinic, with the proportion of Ashkenazi Jewish individuals undergoing additional sequencing ranging from 22.2 to 92.9 %. In Ashkenazi Jewish individuals with a pre-test BRCAPRO risk calculation, the mean risk was significantly higher in those with follow-up sequencing compared to those who did not pursue additional testing. The low prevalence of non-founder BRCA1/2 mutations in Ashkenazi Jewish individuals does not warrant automatically reflexing to full analysis after negative mutation testing. Increased use of mutation probability models may aid in determining which cases warrant additional testing.

Creation of a network to promote universal screening for Lynch syndrome: the LynchSyndrome Screening Network.

The Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Working Group published an evidence-based recommendation stating that every newly diagnosed colorectal cancer (CRC) should undergo tumor screening for Lynch syndrome (LS). In 2011, leading cancer institutions and public health agencies created the Lynch Syndrome Screening Network (LSSN) in order to promote routine LS screening on all newly diagnosed CRCs and endometrial cancers (EC). The LSSN facilitates implementation of appropriate screening via shared resources, protocols and data through network collaboration. The LSSN website contains resources for institutions interested in initiating screening, including materials for program development, implementation and sustainability. The LSSN listserv gives providers access to experts in LS screening and implementation. The LSSN database will allow exploration of key gaps in implementation as a consortia-wide endeavor. To date, the LSSN's membership includes 85 institutions involved in the care of CRC patients and nine official partners such as national and state public health entities and other non-profit institutions. Nearly 80 % of the LSSN's members have already implemented routine or universal CRC and/or EC screening. LSSN serves to further the population health potential of universal LS screening through collaborative efforts and resources.