Inherited Germline Variants in Urinary Tract Cancer: A Multicenter Whole-Exome Sequencing Analysis and Correlation With Clinical Features and Tumor Genomics.

PURPOSE: This study investigates a real-world multicenter cohort of patients with urinary tract cancer (UTC), with primary disease sites including the bladder, urethra, and upper tract, who enrolled for research molecular testing of their germline and tumor. The purpose of this study was to evaluate factors that could affect the likelihood of identifying a clinically actionable germline pathogenic variant (PV). METHODS: Patients with UTC were identified from 10 cancer institutes of the Oncology Research Information Exchange Network consortium. The data set comprised abstracted clinical data with germline and tumor genomic data, and comparative analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Clinically actionable germline PVs in cancer predisposition genes were identified in 16 (4.5%) of 354 patients. A higher proportion of patients with the urethra and the upper tract as the primary sites of disease had PVs with a prevalence of 11% (5/45), compared with only 3.6% (11/308) in those with the bladder as the primary site of disease (P = .04). There were no significant differences in markers of genomic instability (such as tumor mutational burden, microsatellite instability [MSI], and loss of heterozygosity, copy number, and chromosomal instability) between those with PVs and those without (P > .05). Of the PVs identified, 10 (62%) were in homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes, three (19%) in mismatch repair (MMR) genes, and three (19%) in genes associated with other pathways. CONCLUSION: Tissue-based assessment of genomic instability, such as MSI, does not reliably indicate germline PV. A comprehensive clinical germline testing approach that includes HRR genes in addition to MMR genes is likely to yield PVs in approximately one of 10 patients with nonbladder primary disease sites such as the upper tract and the urethra.

Clinical features of prostate cancer by polygenic risk score.

Genome-wide association studies have identified more than 290 single nucleotide variants (SNVs) associated with prostate cancer. These SNVs can be combined to generate a Polygenic Risk Score (PRS), which estimates an individual's risk to develop prostate cancer. Identifying individuals at higher risk for prostate cancer using PRS could allow for personalized screening recommendations, improve current screening tools, and potentially result in improved survival rates, but more research is needed before incorporating them into clinical use. Our study aimed to investigate associations between PRS and clinical factors in affected individuals, including age of diagnosis, metastases, histology, International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group (GG) and family history of prostate cancer, while taking into account germline genetic testing in known prostate cancer related genes. To evaluate the relationship between these clinical factors and PRS, a quantitative retrospective chart review of 250 individuals of European ancestry diagnosed with prostate cancer who received genetic counseling services at The Ohio State University's Genitourinary Cancer Genetics Clinic and a 72-SNV PRS through Ambry Genetics, was performed. We found significant associations between higher PRS and younger age of diagnosis (p = 0.002), lower frequency of metastases (p = 0.006), and having a first-degree relative diagnosed with prostate cancer (p = 0.024). We did not observe significant associations between PRS and ISUP GG, histology or a having a second-degree relative with prostate cancer. These findings provide insights into features associated with higher PRS, but larger multi-ancestral studies using PRS that are informative across populations are needed to understand its clinical utility.

BRCAShare-Assessment of an animated digital message for intrafamilial communication of pathogenic variant positive test results: A feasibility study.

While genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) is well-established in the field of medicine, family members' uptake of cascade genetic testing for known familial pathogenic variants remains low. Probands often become responsible for initiating familial communication about their testing results, and barriers to communication may include difficulty in conveying information to relatives and a lack of communication resources for probands' use. In this study, we tested a two-minute animated digital message (ADM) intervention guided by the Health Belief Model (HBM) in an unselected sample to determine hypothetical individual perceptions of susceptibility and severity and behavioral intention to act on the information provided in the ADM. We recruited genetic testing naïve adults from the United States with no personal history of cancer through Amazon Mechanical Turk to participate in this study. Participants were presented a hypothetical scenario describing a relative's recent HBOC diagnosis, viewed the ADM, and answered a questionnaire assessing participants' perception of the HBM constructs in relation to the hypothetical scenario and participants' intentions to pursue cascade genetic testing, talk to a healthcare professional, or talk to family members after ADM viewing. Participants (n = 373) largely perceived HBOC as serious and believed that they could benefit from the information provided by genetic testing; 76% hypothetically intended to pursue genetic testing at a cost of $100 or less, and 90% intended to either pursue testing or talk to a healthcare provider or family members. This feasibility study in an unaffected population could mimic the experience of distant/less-engaged relatives in HBOC families after receiving unexpected information about cascade genetic testing. Most participants demonstrated behavioral intention toward cascade testing, at a rate higher than literature would suggest is typical in high-risk families, indicating that a theory-supported, simple to use intervention may be useful in clinical practice.

Two unique BAP1 pathogenic variants identified in the same family by panel cascade testing.

Germline pathogenic variants in the tumor suppressor gene BAP1 are associated with the hereditary tumor predisposition syndrome with susceptibility to uveal melanoma, mesothelioma, cutaneous melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, and other cancers. Germline BAP1 pathogenic variants are rare in the non-cancer general population with an estimated carrier frequency of 1:19,898 but more common in cancer patients with a carrier frequency of 1:1299. In the following we present the first report of a family with two unique BAP1 pathogenic variants. Retrospective case report of a family with two unique pathogenic variants in BAP1. A male (proband) was referred to our ocular oncology clinic for second opinion for his multiple independent uveal melanomas at ages 65, 68 and 71. Given his personal history of squamous cell carcinoma at age 61, renal cell carcinoma at age 63, and family history of atypical meningioma, basal cell carcinoma, pancreatic and prostate cancers he was assessed for germline pathogenic variants in BAP1 through our ongoing research study. Sanger sequencing identified the American founder pathogenic variant, c.1717delC, pL573Wfs*3, that was confirmed in a clinical laboratory. Both the proband's brother and nephew tested negative for the familial variant through single site cascade genetic testing. However, based on the personal history of multiple basal cell carcinoma in the nephew and family history of pancreatic and laryngeal cancers (both not known to be associated with BAP1-TPDS), a large cancer panel testing was recommended for the nephew. His panel testing revealed a different BAP1 pathogenic variant, c.605G>A, p. Trp202*. This variant was not detected in the proband or the proband's brother. Based on the frequency of germline BAP1 variants in the cancer population, the chance of occurrence of two different BAP1 variants in a family with cancer history is 5.9 × 10-7. This case report provides support for the importance of offering large panel cascade genetic testing, rather than single site testing for only the family pathogenic variant, for all at risk family members especially when the family variant cannot explain all the cancers in the family.

Polygenic Risk Scores in Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment and Screening.

More than 40% of the risk of developing prostate cancer (PCa) is from genetic factors. Genome-wide association studies have led to the discovery of more than 140 variants associated with PCa risk. Polygenic risk scores (PRS) generated using these variants show promise in identifying individuals at much higher (and lower) lifetime risk than the average man. PCa PRS also improve the predictive value of prostate-specific antigen screening, may inform the age for starting PCa screening, and are informative for development of more aggressive tumors. Despite the promise, few clinical trials have evaluated the benefit of PCa PRS for clinical care.

The impact of a cascade testing video on recipients' knowledge, cognitive message processing, and affective reactions: A formative evaluation.

Cascade genetic testing is essential to clarify cancer risk in families with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) due to pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1 or BRCA2. To date, data suggest that family communication of genetic testing results, with or without the aid of clinical resources such as a provider-written family letter, is impacted by multiple barriers. These barriers eventually lead to sub-optimal uptake of cascade genetic testing. We designed a 2-min animated video that a proband can share with relatives to notify them that the proband has tested positive for a pathogenic variant in BRCA1 or BRCA2. We studied the video via hypothetical scenario in an unselected population to simulate the process by which a relative receives unsolicited genetics information about their family member. We assessed the impact of the video on three specific domains: knowledge, cognitive message processing, and affective reactions. A total of 399 participants recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk completed the study, and 373 were analyzed. The video significantly improved content knowledge/recall (p < .0001) from pre- to post-video viewing, indicating effective message communication. Items used to measure cognitive processing showed preliminary tendencies toward systematic message processing, which could be desired in familial communication aimed at initiating a specific action-in this case, cascade genetic testing. A majority of participants (66%) reported positive affective reaction as they indicated that they would feel gratitude if they received the video message from a relative, and did not evidence a negative affective reaction to receiving the information. Our data suggest that a video message can effectively communicate information about cascade genetic testing to potential relatives with as little as two minutes of content. Our data suggest that video messaging to assist family communication is a reasonable approach that increases understanding and is unlikely to cause harm.

Implementation of Germline Testing for Prostate Cancer: Philadelphia Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2019.

PURPOSE: Germline testing (GT) is a central feature of prostate cancer (PCA) treatment, management, and hereditary cancer assessment. Critical needs include optimized multigene testing strategies that incorporate evolving genetic data, consistency in GT indications and management, and alternate genetic evaluation models that address the rising demand for genetic services. METHODS: A multidisciplinary consensus conference that included experts, stakeholders, and national organization leaders was convened in response to current practice challenges and to develop a genetic implementation framework. Evidence review informed questions using the modified Delphi model. The final framework included criteria with strong (> 75%) agreement (Recommend) or moderate (50% to 74%) agreement (Consider). RESULTS: Large germline panels and somatic testing were recommended for metastatic PCA. Reflex testing-initial testing of priority genes followed by expanded testing-was suggested for multiple scenarios. Metastatic disease or family history suggestive of hereditary PCA was recommended for GT. Additional family history and pathologic criteria garnered moderate consensus. Priority genes to test for metastatic disease treatment included BRCA2, BRCA1, and mismatch repair genes, with broader testing, such as ATM, for clinical trial eligibility. BRCA2 was recommended for active surveillance discussions. Screening starting at age 40 years or 10 years before the youngest PCA diagnosis in a family was recommended for BRCA2 carriers, with consideration in HOXB13, BRCA1, ATM, and mismatch repair carriers. Collaborative (point-of-care) evaluation models between health care and genetic providers was endorsed to address the genetic counseling shortage. The genetic evaluation framework included optimal pretest informed consent, post-test discussion, cascade testing, and technology-based approaches. CONCLUSION: This multidisciplinary, consensus-driven PCA genetic implementation framework provides novel guidance to clinicians and patients tailored to the precision era. Multiple research, education, and policy needs remain of importance.

Breast Cancer Risk Assessment at the Time of Screening Mammography: Perceptions and Clinical Management Outcomes for Women at High Risk.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility of a breast cancer risk assessment (BCRA) at the time of screening mammogram. Women whose BCRA indicated a high risk for cancer received a letter with instructions for breast health care and genetic counseling if appropriate. After 6 months this group received surveys to evaluate their risk perception and their recall of, and compliance with, recommendations. We also explored the impact of other variables such as a recommendation for genetic counseling and physician communication with the women. After the BCRA, the majority of high risk women reported no change in their perceived risk of cancer. A woman's perceived risk of cancer after a BCRA was significantly associated with her recall of recommendations for breast health care, but not with compliance. A recommendation for genetic counseling was not significantly related to women's perceived risk of cancer after the BCRA. Ten percent of women who should have obtained genetic counseling actually completed an appointment. Women who discussed their BCRA results with their physicians were more compliant with a six month breast exam with a doctor (53% vs 17%, p = 0.018). Overall, women felt that the BCRA was helpful and did not cause undue stress or anxiety. Although the cohort's compliance with recommendations was suboptimal, physicians' interactions with their patients may have a positive influence on their compliance.

Barriers to genetic testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients: Do surgeons limit testing?

BACKGROUND: Genetic testing results influence treatment recommendations in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. However, at-risk patients do not uniformly undergo genetic testing. The goal of this study was to identify barriers to genetic testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. METHODS: A prospective database of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients meeting specific criteria over an 18-month period was created and retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 532 patients were identified at risk for genetic mutation. Of these 313 (59%) patients completed a genetic counseling appointment and 292 (55%) underwent genetic testing. One hundred seven (24%) were never referred to genetic counselors and 89 (17%) were referred but did not complete an appointment. Patients referred to genetics were younger than the nonreferred patients (50.9 vs 60.6 years, P < .001). The 89 women referred to genetics who did not complete an appointment were surveyed and had varied reasons for not completing an appointment. CONCLUSIONS: The largest barrier to genetic testing was lack of physician referral; therefore, provider education must be improved. Appointments should be convenient and providers should proactively discuss the significant implications of testing results.

Parental knowledge and attitudes toward hypertrophic cardiomyopathy genetic testing.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a common autosomal dominant condition with an increased risk of sudden cardiac death. Although clinical genetic testing can be used for confirmation of a clinical diagnosis as well as a predictive test, based on our clinical experience it is underutilized. Therefore, we developed and administered a questionnaire to assess potential determinants of parental interest in this testing. Of the 30 adult caregivers who participated, 80% had heard of genetic testing, whereas only 30% knew about genetic testing specifically for HCM. Once informed of the availability, 62% said they would consider testing in the future and 28% would consider it in the next year. Participants' younger age, higher education level, knowledge of carrier testing, and positive view of genetic testing were significantly associated with the participant considering HCM genetic testing for their child (p