Risks of second primary cancers among 584,965 female and male breast cancer survivors in England: a 25-year retrospective cohort study.

Background: Second primary cancers (SPCs) after breast cancer (BC) present an increasing public health burden, with little existing research on socio-demographic, tumour, and treatment effects. We addressed this in the largest BC survivor cohort to date, using a novel linkage of National Disease Registration Service datasets. Methods: The cohort included 581,403 female and 3562 male BC survivors diagnosed between 1995 and 2019. We estimated standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for combined and site-specific SPCs using incidences for England, overall and by age at BC and socioeconomic status. We estimated incidences and Kaplan-Meier cumulative risks stratified by age at BC, and assessed risk variation by socio-demographic, tumour, and treatment characteristics using Cox regression. Findings: Both genders were at elevated contralateral breast (SIR: 2.02 (95% CI: 1.99-2.06) females; 55.4 (35.5-82.4) males) and non-breast (1.10 (1.09-1.11) females, 1.10 (1.00-1.20) males) SPC risks. Non-breast SPC risks were higher for females younger at BC diagnosis (SIR: 1.34 (1.31-1.38) <50 y, 1.07 (1.06-1.09) ≥50 y) and more socioeconomically deprived (SIR: 1.00 (0.98-1.02) least deprived quintile, 1.34 (1.30-1.37) most). Interpretation: Enhanced SPC surveillance may benefit BC survivors, although specific recommendations require more detailed multifactorial risk and cost-benefit analyses. The associations between deprivation and SPC risks could provide clinical management insights. Funding: CRUK Catalyst Award CanGene-CanVar (C61296/A27223). Cancer Research UK grant: PPRPGM-Nov 20∖100,002. This work was supported by core funding from the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (NIHR203312)]. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Breast cancer risk assessment for prescription of Menopausal Hormone Therapy in women who have a family history of breast cancer.

Background Menopausal Hormone Therapy (MHT) can alleviate menopausal symptoms but is associated with increased risk of breast cancer (BC). MHT prescription should be preceded by individualised risk/benefit evaluation; however, data outlining the impact of family history alongside different MHT therapeutic approaches are lacking. Aim To quantify the risks associated with MHT use in women with varying BC family histories of i) developing and ii) dying from BC. Design and setting An epidemiological modelling study (UK women). Method We used i) background risks of BC by age and family history, ii) relative risks for BC associated with MHT use, and iii) 10-year BC-specific net mortality rates to model the risk of developing and dying from BC between the ages of 50 and 80 in women with four different BC family history profiles: 'average', 'modest', 'intermediate', and 'strong'. Results For a woman of 'average' family history taking no MHT, the cumulative BC risk (age 50-80) is 9.8%, and the risk of dying from the BC is 1.7%. Five years' exposure to combined-cyclical MHT (age 50-55) increases these risks to 11.0% and 1.8%, respectively. For a woman with a 'strong' family history taking no MHT, the cumulative BC risk is 19.6%, and the risk of dying is 3.2%. With 5 years of MHT (age 50-55), this increases to 22.4% and 3.5%. Conclusion Both family history and MHT are associated with increased risk of BC. Estimates of the risks associated with MHT for women with different family histories can support decision-making around MHT prescription.

The comprehensive English National Lynch Syndrome Registry: development and description of a new genomics data resource.

Background: Lynch Syndrome (LS) is a cancer predisposition syndrome caused by constitutional pathogenic variants in the mismatch repair (MMR) genes. To date, fragmentation of clinical and genomic data has restricted understanding of national LS ascertainment and outcomes, and precluded evaluation of NICE guidance on testing and management. To address this, via collaboration between researchers, the National Disease Registration Service (NDRS), NHS Genomic Medicine Service Alliances (GMSAs), and NHS Regional Clinical Genetics Services, a comprehensive registry of LS carriers in England has been established. Methods: For comprehensive ascertainment of retrospectively identified MMR pathogenic variant (PV) carriers (diagnosed prior to January 1, 2023), information was retrieved from all clinical genetics services across England, then restructured, amalgamated, and validated via a team of trained experts in NDRS. An online submission portal was established for prospective ascertainment from January 1, 2023. The resulting data, stored in a secure database in NDRS, were used to investigate the demographic and genetic characteristics of the cohort, censored at July 25, 2023. Cancer outcomes were investigated via linkage to the National Cancer Registration Dataset (NCRD). Findings: A total of 11,722 retrospective and 570 prospective data submissions were received, resulting in a comprehensive English National Lynch Syndrome Registry (ENLSR) comprising 9030 unique individuals. The most frequently identified pathogenic MMR genes were MSH2 and MLH1 at 37.2% (n = 3362) and 29.1% (n = 2624), respectively. 35.9% (n = 3239) of the ENLSR cohort received their LS diagnosis before their first cancer diagnosis (presumptive predictive germline test). Of these, 6.3% (n = 204) developed colorectal cancer, at a median age of initial diagnosis of 51 (IQR 40-62), compared to 73 years (IQR 64-80) in the general population (p < 0.0001). Interpretation: The ENLSR represents the first comprehensive national registry of PV carriers in England and one of the largest cohorts of MMR PV carriers worldwide. The establishment of a secure, centralised infrastructure and mechanism for routine registration of newly identified carriers ensures sustainability of the data resource. Funding: This work was funded by the Wellcome Trust, Cancer Research UK and Bowel Cancer UK. The funder of this study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report.

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.

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.

Germline mismatch repair (MMR) gene analyses from English NHS regional molecular genomics laboratories 1996-2020: development of a national resource of patient-level genomics laboratory records.

OBJECTIVE: To describe national patterns of National Health Service (NHS) analysis of mismatch repair (MMR) genes in England using individual-level data submitted to the National Disease Registration Service (NDRS) by the NHS regional molecular genetics laboratories. DESIGN: Laboratories submitted individual-level patient data to NDRS against a prescribed data model, including (1) patient identifiers, (2) test episode data, (3) per-gene results and (4) detected sequence variants. Individualised per-laboratory algorithms were designed and applied in NDRS to extract and map the data to the common data model. Laboratory-level MMR activity audit data from the Clinical Molecular Genetics Society/Association of Clinical Genomic Science were used to assess early years' missing data. RESULTS: Individual-level data from patients undergoing NHS MMR germline genetic testing were submitted from all 13 English laboratories performing MMR analyses, comprising in total 16 722 patients (9649 full-gene, 7073 targeted), with the earliest submission from 2000. The NDRS dataset is estimated to comprise >60% of NHS MMR analyses performed since inception of NHS MMR analysis, with complete national data for full-gene analyses for 2016 onwards. Out of 9649 full-gene tests, 2724 had an abnormal result, approximately 70% of which were (likely) pathogenic. Data linkage to the National Cancer Registry demonstrated colorectal cancer was the most frequent cancer type in which full-gene analysis was performed. CONCLUSION: The NDRS MMR dataset is a unique national pan-laboratory amalgamation of individual-level clinical and genomic patient data with pseudonymised identifiers enabling linkage to other national datasets. This growing resource will enable longitudinal research and can form the basis of a live national genomic disease registry.

T cell response to SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the T cell response to SARS-CoV-2 is critical to vaccine development, epidemiological surveillance and disease control strategies. This systematic review critically evaluates and synthesises the relevant peer-reviewed and pre-print literature published from 01/01/2020-26/06/2020. METHODS: For this systematic review, keyword-structured literature searches were carried out in MEDLINE, Embase and COVID-19 Primer. Papers were independently screened by two researchers, with arbitration of disagreements by a third researcher. Data were independently extracted into a pre-designed Excel template and studies critically appraised using a modified version of the MetaQAT tool, with resolution of disagreements by consensus. Findings were narratively synthesised. RESULTS: 61 articles were included. 55 (90%) studies used observational designs, 50 (82%) involved hospitalised patients with higher acuity illness, and the majority had important limitations. Symptomatic adult COVID-19 cases consistently show peripheral T cell lymphopenia, which positively correlates with increased disease severity, duration of RNA positivity, and non-survival; while asymptomatic and paediatric cases display preserved counts. People with severe or critical disease generally develop more robust, virus-specific T cell responses. T cell memory and effector function has been demonstrated against multiple viral epitopes, and, cross-reactive T cell responses have been demonstrated in unexposed and uninfected adults, but the significance for protection and susceptibility, respectively, remains unclear. CONCLUSION: A complex pattern of T cell response to SARS-CoV-2 infection has been demonstrated, but inferences regarding population level immunity are hampered by significant methodological limitations and heterogeneity between studies, as well as a striking lack of research in asymptomatic or pauci-symptomatic individuals. In contrast to antibody responses, population-level surveillance of the T cell response is unlikely to be feasible in the near term. Focused evaluation in specific sub-groups, including vaccine recipients, should be prioritised.

Horses for courses? Assessing the potential value of a surrogate, point-of-care test for SARS-CoV-2 epidemic control.

Point-of-care tests (POCTs) offer considerable potential for improving clinical and public health management of COVID-19 by providing timely information to guide decision-making, but data on real-world performance are in short supply. Besides SARS-CoV-2-specific tests, there is growing interest in the role of surrogate (non-specific) tests such as FebriDx, a biochemical POCT which can be used to distinguish viral from bacterial infection in patients with influenza-like illnesses. This short report assesses what is currently known about FebriDx performance across settings and populations by comparison with some of the more intensively evaluated SARS-CoV-2-specific POCTs. While FebriDx shows some potential in supporting triage for early-stage infection in acute care settings, this is dependent on SARS-CoV-2 being the most likely cause for influenza-like illnesses, with reduction in discriminatory power when COVID-19 case numbers are low, and when co-circulating viral respiratory infections become more prevalent during the autumn and winter. Too little is currently known about its performance in primary care and the community to support use in these contexts, and further evaluation is needed. Reliable SARS CoV2-specific POCTs-when they become available-are likely to rapidly overtake surrogates as the preferred option given the greater specificity they provide.

Antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Progress in characterising the humoral immune response to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been rapid but areas of uncertainty persist. Assessment of the full range of evidence generated to date to understand the characteristics of the antibody response, its dynamics over time, its determinants and the immunity it confers will have a range of clinical and policy implications for this novel pathogen. This review comprehensively evaluated evidence describing the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 published from 01/01/2020-26/06/2020. METHODS: Systematic review. Keyword-structured searches were carried out in MEDLINE, Embase and COVID-19 Primer. Articles were independently screened on title, abstract and full text by two researchers, with arbitration of disagreements. Data were double-extracted into a pre-designed template, and studies critically appraised using a modified version of the Public Health Ontario Meta-tool for Quality Appraisal of Public Health Evidence (MetaQAT) tool, with resolution of disagreements by consensus. Findings were narratively synthesised. RESULTS: 150 papers were included. Most studies (113 or 75%) were observational in design, were based wholly or primarily on data from hospitalised patients (108, 72%) and had important methodological limitations. Few considered mild or asymptomatic infection. Antibody dynamics were well described in the acute phase, up to around three months from disease onset, but the picture regarding correlates of the antibody response was inconsistent. IgM was consistently detected before IgG in included studies, peaking at weeks two to five and declining over a further three to five weeks post-symptom onset depending on the patient group; IgG peaked around weeks three to seven post-symptom onset then plateaued, generally persisting for at least eight weeks. Neutralising antibodies were detectable within seven to 15 days following disease onset, with levels increasing until days 14-22 before levelling and then decreasing, but titres were lower in those with asymptomatic or clinically mild disease. Specific and potent neutralising antibodies have been isolated from convalescent plasma. Cross-reactivity but limited cross-neutralisation with other human coronaviridae was reported. Evidence for protective immunity in vivo was limited to small, short-term animal studies, showing promising initial results in the immediate recovery phase. CONCLUSIONS: Literature on antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 is of variable quality with considerable heterogeneity of methods, study participants, outcomes measured and assays used. Although acute phase antibody dynamics are well described, longer-term patterns are much less well evidenced. Comprehensive assessment of the role of demographic characteristics and disease severity on antibody responses is needed. Initial findings of low neutralising antibody titres and possible waning of titres over time may have implications for sero-surveillance and disease control policy, although further evidence is needed. The detection of potent neutralising antibodies in convalescent plasma is important in the context of development of therapeutics and vaccines. Due to limitations with the existing evidence base, large, cross-national cohort studies using appropriate statistical analysis and standardised serological assays and clinical classifications should be prioritised.

Clinical and historical aspects of the Elephant Man: exploring the facts and the myths.

Joseph Merrick, the Elephant Man, presented to the Royal London Hospital in 1884 with an obscure condition that puzzled his contemporaries, and fascinates clinicians to this day. Throughout the 1900s, a number of theories were advanced to explain the numerous growths that covered his body: neurofibromatosis, Proteus syndrome, and a combination of childhood injury, fibrous dysplasia, and pyarthrosis. The debate continued throughout the 20th century without resolution. Today, new consensus on the genetic and clinical diagnosis of neurofibromatosis and Proteus syndrome has allowed advancements in the Elephant Man's diagnosis. Using recent clinical diagnostic criteria it is now possible to conclude that Joseph Merrick was in all likelihood suffering from Proteus syndrome. Nevertheless, details of his genotype remain unknown. Obtaining intact DNA from the Elephant Man's skeleton is challenging, yet it is possible that sequencing Merrick's genome could provide genetic confirmation of his clinical diagnosis, and shed light on the process of tumourigenesis.

Pycnodysostosis and the making of an artist.

Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec, a 19th century artist celebrated for his depictions of the Moulin Rouge and Parisian nightlife, suffered from an unknown disorder. His symptoms were not only rare, but also difficult to determine. Both during his lifetime and following his death potential diagnoses have proved controversial, including the most popularly supported suggestion of pycnodysostosis. Addressing the ongoing debate of Toulouse-Lautrec's diagnosis, this article reconsiders the evidence. It summarises multiple perspectives and draws on more recent medical research, while acknowledging that the available sources are often unreliable. Ultimately, while there may be no definitive solution to the mystery of Toulouse-Lautrec's diagnosis, it is possible to draw one conclusion. Observing its impact on his life and work, it is clear that the condition formed the foundation of Toulouse-Lautrec's artistic career, shaping the way he perceived the world and defining the artworks that are now so widely admired.