Clinical Actionability of Multigene Panel Testing for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk Assessment.

IMPORTANCE: The practice of genetic testing for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer (HBOC) is rapidly evolving owing to the recent introduction of multigene panels. While these tests may identify 40% to 50% more individuals with hereditary cancer gene mutations than does testing for BRCA1/2 alone, whether finding such mutations will alter clinical management is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To define the potential clinical effect of multigene panel testing for HBOC in a clinically representative cohort. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational study of patients seen between 2001 and 2014 in 3 large academic medical centers. We prospectively enrolled 1046 individuals who were appropriate candidates for HBOC evaluation and who lacked BRCA1/2 mutations. INTERVENTIONS: We carried out multigene panel testing on all participants, then determined the clinical actionability, if any, of finding non-BRCA1/2 mutations in these and additional comparable individuals. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We evaluated the likelihood of (1) a posttest management change and (2) an indication for additional familial testing, considering gene-specific consensus management guidelines, gene-associated cancer risks, and personal and family history. RESULTS: Among 1046 study participants, 40 BRCA1/2-negative patients (3.8%; 95% CI, 2.8%-5.2%) harbored deleterious mutations, most commonly in moderate-risk breast and ovarian cancer genes (CHEK2, ATM, and PALB2) and Lynch syndrome genes. Among these and an additional 23 mutation-positive individuals enrolled from our clinics, most of the mutations (92%) were consistent with the spectrum of cancer(s) observed in the patient or family, suggesting that these results are clinically significant. Among all 63 mutation-positive patients, additional disease-specific screening and/or prevention measures beyond those based on personal and family history alone would be considered for most (33 [52%] of 63; 95% CI, 40.3%-64.2%). Furthermore, additional familial testing would be considered for those with first-degree relatives (42 [72%] of 58; 95% CI, 59.8%-82.2%) based on potential management changes for mutation-positive relatives. This clinical effect was not restricted to a few of the tested genes because most identified genes could change clinical management for some patients. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a clinically representative cohort, multigene panel testing for HBOC risk assessment yielded findings likely to change clinical management for substantially more patients than does BRCA1/2 testing alone. Multigene testing in this setting is likely to alter near-term cancer risk assessment and management recommendations for mutation-affected individuals across a broad spectrum of cancer predisposition genes.

Clinical applications of melanoma genetics.

Families that have several relatives with melanoma, multiple primary melanomas in one individual, younger than average ages of melanoma onset, and/or the presence of both pancreatic cancer and melanoma may be suggestive of a hereditary melanoma syndrome and are candidates for genetic counseling and risk assessment. Genetic counseling for hereditary melanoma presents many complexities. Only a minority of hereditary melanoma cases have been attributed to a single genetic factor, CDKN2A. Both the frequency and the penetrance of CDKN2A mutations has been shown to be dependent on multiple factors. The clinical utility of genetic testing for hereditary melanoma families is debatable because CDKN2A status may not impact medical management in patients with melanoma. No standard medical management guidelines exist for families with CDKN2A mutations; however, family history of melanoma and pancreatic cancer may warrant further discussion. Clinicians should discuss the clinical and psychological implications before genetic testing. Genetic counseling and pretest education regarding melanoma risk factors provides an opportunity to increase knowledge and understanding of melanoma risk, while addressing psychological risks and concerns.

Melanoma susceptibility genes and risk assessment.

Familial melanoma accounts for approximately a tenth of all melanoma cases. The most commonly known melanoma susceptibility gene is the highly penetrant CDKN2A (p16INK4a) locus, which is transmitted in an autosomal dominant fashion and accounts for approximately 20-50 % of familial melanoma cases. Mutated p16INK4a shows impaired capacity to inhibit the cyclin D1-CDK4 complex, allowing for unchecked cell cycle progression. Mutations in the second protein coded by CDKN2A, p14ARF, are much less common and result in proteasomal degradation of p53 with subsequent accumulation of DNA damage as the cell progresses through the cell cycle without a functional p53-mediated DNA damage response. Mutations in CDK4 that impair the inhibitory interaction with p16INK4a also increase melanoma risk but these mutations are extremely rare. Genes of the melanin biosynthetic pathway, including MC1R and MITF, have also been implicated in melanomagenesis. MC1R variants were traditionally thought to increase risk for melanoma secondary to intensified UV-mediated DNA damage in the setting of absent photoprotective eumelanin. Accumulation of pheomelanin, which appears to have a carcinogenic effect regardless of UV exposure, may be a more likely mechanism. Impaired SUMOylation of the E318K variant of MITF results in increased transcription of genes that confer melanocytes with a pro-malignant phenotype. Mutations in the tumor suppressor BAP1 enhance the metastatic potential of uveal melanoma and predispose to cutaneous/ocular melanoma, atypical melanocytic tumors, and other internal malignancies (COMMON syndrome). Genome-wide association studies have identified numerous low-risk alleles. Although several melanoma susceptibility genes have been identified, risk assessment tools have been developed only for the most common gene implicated with hereditary melanoma, CDKN2A. MelaPRO, a validated model that relies on Mendelian inheritance and Bayesian probability theories, estimates carrier probability for CDKN2A and future risk of melanoma taking into account a patient's family and past medical history of melanoma. Genetic testing for CDKN2A mutations is currently available but the Melanoma Genetics Consortium recommends offering such testing to patients only in the context of research protocols because clinical utility is uncertain.

Genetic testing by cancer site: skin.

Many hereditary cancer predisposition syndromes are associated with cutaneous findings, both benign and malignant. Dermatological examination and histopathology, when combined with a thorough personal and family medical history, play an important role in the diagnosis of cancer predisposition syndromes. Skin findings are an important diagnostic tool for a variety of cancer syndromes, including Cowden syndrome, Birt-Hogg-Dubé, hereditary leiomyomatosis renal cell carcinoma, and others. This article focuses on the phenotype, medical management, and genetic testing for 4 hereditary cancer syndromes that include cutaneous findings: hereditary melanoma, basal cell nevus syndrome, neurofibromatosis type 1, and neurofibromatosis type 2.

Germline BAP1 inactivation is preferentially associated with metastatic ocular melanoma and cutaneous-ocular melanoma families.

BACKGROUND: BAP1 has been shown to be a target of both somatic alteration in high-risk ocular melanomas (OM) and germline inactivation in a few individuals from cancer-prone families. These findings suggest that constitutional BAP1 changes may predispose individuals to metastatic OM and that familial permeation of deleterious alleles could delineate a new cancer syndrome. DESIGN: To characterize BAP1's contribution to melanoma risk, we sequenced BAP1 in a set of 100 patients with OM, including 50 metastatic OM cases and 50 matched non-metastatic OM controls, and 200 individuals with cutaneous melanoma (CM) including 7 CM patients from CM-OM families and 193 CM patients from CM-non-OM kindreds. RESULTS: Germline BAP1 mutations were detected in 4/50 patients with metastatic OM and 0/50 cases of non-metastatic OM (8% vs. 0%, p = 0.059). Since 2/4 of the BAP1 carriers reported a family history of CM, we analyzed 200 additional hereditary CM patients and found mutations in 2/7 CM probands from CM-OM families and 1/193 probands from CM-non-OM kindreds (29% vs. 0.52%, p = .003). Germline mutations co-segregated with both CM and OM phenotypes and were associated with the presence of unique nevoid melanomas and highly atypical nevoid melanoma-like melanocytic proliferations (NEMMPs). Interestingly, 7/14 germline variants identified to date reside in C-terminus suggesting that the BRCA1 binding domain is important in cancer predisposition. CONCLUSION: Germline BAP1 mutations are associated with a more aggressive OM phenotype and a recurrent phenotypic complex of cutaneous/ocular melanoma, atypical melanocytic proliferations and other internal neoplasms (ie. COMMON syndrome), which could be a useful clinical marker for constitutive BAP1 inactivation.

Which individuals undergoing BRACAnalysis need BART testing?

Deleterious mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 include those identified by sequencing technology as well as large genomic rearrangements (LGR). The main testing laboratory in the United States, Myriad Genetics Laboratory (MGL), has defined criteria for inclusion of LGR testing (i.e., BRACAnalysis Rearrangement Test, or BART™) when BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing is ordered. We were interested in determining how many of our patients with LGR mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 fulfilled these MGL criteria. A retrospective chart review was performed on all individuals who underwent genetic testing at our institution since August 2006. Individuals who underwent LGR testing were classified as either having or not having a LGR in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Each individual's history was classified as meeting MGL defined LGR criteria, meeting criteria using third-degree relatives, or not meeting criteria. A total of 257 BART tests were ordered at our institution from August 2006 to August 2009. Five individuals (1.9%) had an LGR mutation. Two LGR were identified in patients who met MGL defined LGR criteria. One LGR was identified in a patient that met MGL defined LGR criteria only when using third-degree relatives. Two LGR were identified in individuals who did not meet MGL defined criteria. LGR are present in individuals who do not have a high pretest probability of carrying a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. These data suggest that when BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing is performed, testing should always include LGR testing so that the results are the most comprehensive and reliable.

Genetic determinants of cutaneous melanoma predisposition.

In the last 2 decades, advances in genomic technologies and molecular biology have accelerated the identification of multiple genetic loci that confer risk for cutaneous melanoma. The risk alleles range from rarely occurring, high-risk variants with a strong familial predisposition to low-risk to moderate-risk variants with modest melanoma association. Although the high-risk alleles are limited to the CDKN2A and CDK4 loci, the authors of recent genome-wide association studies have uncovered a set of variants in pigmentation loci that contribute to low risk. A biological validation of these new findings would provide greater understanding of the disease. In this review we describe some of the important risk loci and their association to risk of developing cutaneous melanoma and also address the current clinical challenges in CDKN2A genetic testing.