Preventing amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: insights from pre-symptomatic neurodegenerative diseases.

Significant progress has been made in understanding the pre-symptomatic phase of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. While much is still unknown, advances in other neurodegenerative diseases offer valuable insights. Indeed, it is increasingly clear that the well-recognized clinical syndromes of Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, spinal muscular atrophy and frontotemporal dementia are also each preceded by a pre-symptomatic or prodromal period of varying duration, during which the underlying disease process unfolds, with associated compensatory changes and loss of inherent system redundancy. Key insights from these diseases highlight opportunities for discovery in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The development of biomarkers reflecting amyloid and tau has led to a shift in defining Alzheimer's disease based on inferred underlying histopathology. Parkinson's disease is unique among neurodegenerative diseases in the number and diversity of non-genetic biomarkers of pre-symptomatic disease, most notably REM sleep behaviour disorder. Huntington's disease benefits from an ability to predict the likely timing of clinically manifest disease based on age and CAG-repeat length alongside reliable neuroimaging markers of atrophy. Spinal muscular atrophy clinical trials have highlighted the transformational value of early therapeutic intervention, and studies in frontotemporal dementia illustrate the differential role of biomarkers based on genotype. Similar advances in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis would transform our understanding of key events in pathogenesis, thereby dramatically accelerating progress towards disease prevention. Deciphering the biology of pre-symptomatic amyotrophic lateral sclerosis relies on a clear conceptual framework for defining the earliest stages of disease. Clinically manifest amyotrophic lateral sclerosis may emerge abruptly, especially among those who harbour genetic mutations associated with rapidly progressive amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. However, the disease may also evolve more gradually, revealing a prodromal period of mild motor impairment preceding phenoconversion to clinically manifest disease. Similarly, cognitive and behavioural impairment, when present, may emerge gradually, evolving through a prodromal period of mild cognitive impairment or mild behavioural impairment before progression to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Biomarkers are critically important to studying pre-symptomatic amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and essential to efforts to intervene therapeutically before clinically manifest disease emerges. The use of non-genetic biomarkers, however, presents challenges related to counselling, informed consent, communication of results and limited protections afforded by existing legislation. Experiences from pre-symptomatic genetic testing and counselling, and the legal protections against discrimination based on genetic data, may serve as a guide. Building on what we have learned-more broadly from other pre-symptomatic neurodegenerative diseases and specifically from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis gene mutation carriers-we present a road map to early intervention, and perhaps even disease prevention, for all forms of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Validation of Version 3.0 of the Breast Cancer Genetics Referral Screening Tool (B-RST™).

PURPOSE: Despite increased awareness of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer among clinicians and the public, many BRCA1/2 mutation carriers remain unaware of their risk status. The Breast Cancer Genetics Referral Screening Tool (B-RST™) was created and validated to easily identify individuals at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer for referral to cancer genetics services. The purpose of this study was to revise B-RST™ to maximize sensitivity against BRCA1/2 mutation status. METHODS: We analyzed pedigrees of 277 individuals who had undergone BRCA1/2 testing to determine modifications to the B-RST™ 2.0 algorithm that would maximize sensitivity for mutations, while maintaining simplicity. We used McNemar's chi-square test to compare validation measures between the revised version (3.0) and the 2.0 version. RESULTS: Algorithmic changes made to B-RST™ 2.0 increased the sensitivity against BRCA1/2 mutation analysis from 71.1 to 94.0% (P < 0.0001). While specificity decreased, all screen-positive individuals were appropriate for cancer genetics referral, the primary purpose of the tool. CONCLUSION: Despite calls for BRCA1/2 population screening, there remains a critical need to identify those most at risk who should receive cancer genetics services. B-RST™ version 3.0 demonstrates high sensitivity for BRCA1/2 mutations, yet remains a simple and quick screening tool for at-risk individuals.

Prevention and Screening in Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer.

In recent years, we have learned a great deal about pathogenic mutations that increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancer, particularly mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Here we review current guidelines on breast and ovarian cancer screening, prophylactic surgery, and other risk-reduction strategies in patients with these mutations, and we detail the data that drive these recommendations. We also discuss guidelines on screening and management for other cancers associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2, such as male breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, and prostate cancer. Discussions about genetic testing have become more complex with the advent of panel testing, which often allows for testing of a more comprehensive panel of genes than traditional BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing, but which is also associated with a higher likelihood of obtaining results with less clear data to inform management. It is difficult to come to a consensus on how best to address the varied and potentially challenging situations that may arise from genetic testing. The complexity inherent in managing these cases makes a multidisciplinary team-including medical oncologists, surgical oncologists, genetic counselors, reproductive endocrinologists, and medical ethicists-critical to optimization of care.

Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis by Next-Generation Sequencing.

Pathogenic germline variants causally contribute to the etiology of colorectal cancer (CRC) and polyposis. The era of massively parallel sequencing, also known as next-generation sequencing (NGS), make it highly possible, effective, and efficient to offer rapid and cost-effective diagnosis for CRC. To aid clinical laboratories in testing the most clinically significant genes, along with the published ACMG CRC technical standard guidelines, this protocol aims to provide a step-by-step technical workflow for carrying out the NGS-panel based CRC molecular diagnosis focusing on the wet lab portion of library preparation and massively parallel sequencing. Using the most popular pull-down-based target enrichment, the chapter particularly encompasses genomic DNA (gDNA) fragmentation, adapter ligation, indexing, hybridization, and capture, which is the most variable and technically challenging part of NGS testing involving at least 3 quality control (QC) checkpoints plus the pre- and post-capture PCR. The gDNA extraction and sequencing is less covered because they are relatively standard technologies with little variations and choices. Although this protocol also introduces pertinent testing algorithms and a brief guideline for pre- and post-testing genetic counselling, the audiences are required to refer to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) clinical practice guidelines to determine the most appropriate testing strategies. Since NGS panel-based testing is a highly complex and dynamic platform with multiple choices from different technology and commercial resources, this technical benchtop-based protocol also aims to cover some of the key ramification points for decision-making by each laboratory at the discretion of the directors. © 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC. Basic Protocol: Hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis by next-generation sequencing.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Telehealth Cancer Genetics Program: A BRCA Pilot Study.

INTRODUCTION: Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) individuals face a 1 in 40 (2.5%) risk of having a BRCA mutation, which is 10 times the general population risk. JScreen launched the PEACH BRCA Study, a telehealth-based platform for BRCA education and testing, with the goal of creating an effective model for BRCA testing in low-risk AJ individuals who do not meet national testing criteria. Other goals were to determine the rate of BRCA mutations in this group, to assess the adequacy of screening for the 3 common AJ founder mutations only, and to assess satisfaction with the telehealth model to help inform a national launch of a broader cancer genetic testing program. METHODS: Criteria for participation included those who were AJ, resided in the metro-Atlanta area, were aged 25 and older, and had no personal or close family history of BRCA-related cancers. Pre-test education was provided through a video and written summary, followed by complimentary BRCA1/2 sequencing and post-test genetic counseling. Participants responded to pre- and post-test surveys, which assessed knowledge and satisfaction. Those who were not eligible to participate were sent genetic counseling resources and later surveyed. RESULTS: Five hundred one participants were tested and the results included 4 positives (0.8% positivity rate), 494 negatives, and 3 variants of uncertain significance. Overall satisfaction with the study process was high (96.9/100), knowledge about BRCA was high (97.5% of participants passed a pre-test knowledge quiz), and satisfaction with pre- and post-test education was high (97.9% of participants were satisfied with the pre-test video and written summary, and 99.5% felt that their post-test genetic counseling session was valuable). Many participants expressed interest in receiving broader cancer testing. CONCLUSIONS: The BRCA founder mutation rate in a low-risk AJ population was significantly lower than the previously established AJ rate of 1 in 40. It was also determined that a telehealth model for a cancer genetics program is effective and acceptable to the population tested. This study established interest in broader cancer genetic testing through a telehealth platform and suggested that testing may be successful in the Jewish community at a national level and potentially in other populations, provided that patient education and genetic counseling are adequately incorporated.

Impact of presymptomatic genetic testing for familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

PURPOSE: The Pre-familial Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (Pre-fALS) study is a longitudinal study of individuals potentially at risk for developing familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Our goals were to (1) explore participants' decisions of whether to learn results of presymptomatic testing or not; (2) understand the psychosocial impact of these decisions; and (3) assess preferences for receiving results by telephone or in person. METHODS: The sample for this substudy comprised 20 participants drawn randomly from autosomal dominant mutant superoxide dismutase 1 families in the Pre-fALS study. Twenty participants completed a semistructured phone interview; prominent themes were identified and rated. RESULTS: Fourteen participants chose to learn results; six had mutant superoxide dismutase 1 and eight had wild-type superoxide dismutase 1. Of the six who initially elected nondisclosure, three were reconsidering their decision. Regardless of the results and method of counseling, participants had adapted well, at least in the short term. CONCLUSION: We recommend that (1) those considering presymptomatic genetic testing should undergo professional counseling to help decide whether to learn results; (2) discussion should include the option of telephone genetic counseling for those without easy access to in-person counseling; and (3) those who initially decline to learn results should be offered the opportunity to learn their mutation status as their decision evolves.

Impact of Implementing B-RSTTM to Screen for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer on Risk Perception and Genetic Counseling Uptake Among Women in an Academic Safety Net Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Lower socioeconomic status is strongly associated with decreased perception of cancer risk. Fewer low socioeconomic status women than expected currently access cancer genetic services from which they may benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We screened women presenting for a screening mammogram at a safety net academic hospital using the Breast Cancer Genetics Referral Screening Tool Version 3.0 (B-RSTTM), an online tool designed to identify individuals potentially at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Participants screening either positive (high risk) or negative (moderate risk) were offered genetic counseling appointments. We used a brief survey to evaluate change in risk perception before and after using B-RSTTM, and after a genetic counseling appointment, if applicable. Barriers to accepting appointments were assessed when participants declined. RESULTS: Of the 126 participants, 91 (72.2%) screened negative-average risk, 13 (10.3%) screened negative-moderate risk, and 22 (17.5%) screened positive. Of those who screened positive or negative-moderate, 24 (68.6%) expressed interested in a genetic counseling appointment, of which 19 (79.2%) scheduled. Four of the 19 scheduled (21.1%) completed the appointment. We found a significant difference in the number who rated their breast cancer risk correctly on the post-test between the groups who self-rated as low, moderate, or high risk. Those who perceived themselves as high risk were the most likely to rate their risk correctly on the post-test (P < .001). CONCLUSION: We showed that using B-RSTTM in a safety net academic hospital was effective at identifying women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Genetic evaluation and testing for hereditary forms of cancer in the era of next-generation sequencing.

The introduction of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology in testing for hereditary cancer susceptibility allows testing of multiple cancer susceptibility genes simultaneously. While there are many potential benefits to utilizing this technology in the hereditary cancer clinic, including efficiency of time and cost, there are also important limitations that must be considered. The best panel for the given clinical situation should be selected to minimize the number of variants of unknown significance. The inclusion in panels of low penetrance or newly identified genes without specific actionability can be problematic for interpretation. Genetic counselors are an essential part of the hereditary cancer risk assessment team, helping the medical team select the most appropriate test and interpret the often complex results. Genetic counselors obtain an extended family history, counsel patients on the available tests and the potential implications of results for themselves and their family members (pre-test counseling), explain to patients the implications of the test results (post-test counseling), and assist in testing family members at risk.

Presymptomatic ALS genetic counseling and testing: Experience and recommendations.

Remarkable advances in our understanding of the genetic contributions to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) have sparked discussion and debate about whether clinical genetic testing should routinely be offered to patients with ALS. A related, but distinct, question is whether presymptomatic genetic testing should be offered to family members who may be at risk for developing ALS. Existing guidelines for presymptomatic counseling and testing are mostly based on small number of individuals, clinical judgment, and experience from other neurodegenerative disorders. Over the course of the last 8 years, we have provided testing and 317 genetic counseling sessions (including predecision, pretest, posttest, and ad hoc counseling) to 161 first-degree family members participating in the Pre-Symptomatic Familial ALS Study (Pre-fALS), as well as testing and 75 posttest counseling sessions to 63 individuals with familial ALS. Based on this experience, and the real-world challenges we have had to overcome in the process, we recommend an updated set of guidelines for providing presymptomatic genetic counseling and testing to people at high genetic risk for developing ALS. These recommendations are especially timely and relevant given the growing interest in studying presymptomatic ALS.

Adverse events in cancer genetic testing: the third case series.

After repeated media attention in 2013 due to the Angelina Jolie disclosure and the Supreme Court decision to ban gene patents, the demand for cancer genetic counseling and testing services has never been greater. Debate has arisen regarding who should provide such services and the quality of genetics services being offered. In this ongoing case series, we document 35 new cases from 7 states (California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Utah) and the District of Columbia of adverse outcomes in cancer genetic testing when performed without the involvement of a certified genetic counselor. We identified 3 major themes of errors: wrong genetic tests ordered, genetic test results misinterpreted, and inadequate genetic counseling. Patient morbidity and mortality were an issue in several of these cases. The complexity of cancer genetic testing and counseling has grown exponentially with the advent of multigene panels that include rare genes and the potential for more variants of uncertain significance. We conclude that genetic counseling and testing should be offered by certified genetics providers to minimize the risks, maximize the benefits, and utilize health care dollars most efficiently.

Adverse events in cancer genetic testing: medical, ethical, legal, and financial implications.

Cancer genetic counseling and testing are now integral services in progressive cancer care. There has been much debate over whether these services should be delivered by providers with specialized training in genetics or by all clinicians. Adverse outcomes resulting from cancer genetic counseling and testing performed by clinicians without specialization in genetics have been reported, but formal documentation is sparse. In this review, we present a series of national cases illustrating major patterns of errors in cancer genetic counseling and testing and the resulting impact on medical liability, health care costs, and the patients and their families.