Outcomes of a universal germline screening program in a community urology practice.

The role of germline genetic testing in urologic oncology has expanded in recent years. However, implementation of genetic testing in community practices remains a challenge, often due to limited access to qualified genetics trained providers. In this study, we report outcomes of a universal germline screening program in a community urology practice. Between November 2021 and September 2022, all patients referred for urology clinic visits at Frederick Health (Frederick, MD, USA) were provided an online genetics screening questionnaire prior to the visit. Responses were compared against National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for germline testing. Those who met criteria were provided educational materials at the end of the questionnaire, and then counseled by a trained urologic oncologist (HC) in the clinic or referred to a genetic counselor prior to testing. Testing was performed with a 36-gene pan-cancer panel (CancerNext) or a 14-gene targeted prostate cancer panel (ProstateNext), with or without additional RNA analysis (RNAinsight) (Ambry Genetics, CA, USA). Demographic and clinical parameters, as well as genetic testing results, were retrospectively collected under IRB approval. In the study period, 765 patients were seen over 1370 clinic visits. Of these, 505 patients (66.0%) completed the screening questionnaire. The majority were completed via email (54.5%) with the remainder (45.5%) via text message. Of the patients who completed screening, 125/505 (24.7%) met NCCN criteria for germline testing. 58/125 patients (46.4%) who met criteria underwent germline testing, of whom 5/58 (8.6%) had distinct pathogenic mutations identified. These included actionable mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, and CHEK2, as well as an additional pathogenic mutation in NBN. Variants of unknown significance were identified in 8/58 patients (13.8%) in 11 total genes. Challenges to implementation of this program included meeting institutional requirements for genetic testing consent, facilitating specimen collection in clinic, and integration of results into the electronic health record. Genetic risk assessment for high-risk individuals is feasible as part of a universal screening program in a community urology practice. Approximately 8% of tested patients were found to have pathogenic germline mutations, which is consistent with contemporary tertiary referral cohorts.

MLH1-methylated endometrial cancer under 60 years of age as the "sentinel" cancer in female carriers of high-risk constitutional MLH1 epimutation.

OBJECTIVE: Universal screening of endometrial carcinoma (EC) for mismatch repair deficiency (MMRd) and Lynch syndrome uses presence of MLH1 methylation to omit common sporadic cases from follow-up germline testing. However, this overlooks rare cases with high-risk constitutional MLH1 methylation (epimutation), a poorly-recognized mechanism that predisposes to Lynch-type cancers with MLH1 methylation. We aimed to determine the role and frequency of constitutional MLH1 methylation among EC cases with MMRd, MLH1-methylated tumors. METHODS: We screened blood for constitutional MLH1 methylation using pyrosequencing and real-time methylation-specific PCR in patients with MMRd, MLH1-methylated EC ascertained from (i) cancer clinics (n = 4, <60 years), and (ii) two population-based cohorts; "Columbus-area" (n = 68, all ages) and "Ohio Colorectal Cancer Prevention Initiative (OCCPI)" (n = 24, <60 years). RESULTS: Constitutional MLH1 methylation was identified in three out of four patients diagnosed between 36 and 59 years from cancer clinics. Two had mono-/hemiallelic epimutation (∼50% alleles methylated). One with multiple primaries had low-level mosaicism in normal tissues and somatic "second-hits" affecting the unmethylated allele in all tumors, demonstrating causation. In the population-based cohorts, all 68 cases from the Columbus-area cohort were negative and low-level mosaic constitutional MLH1 methylation was identified in one patient aged 36 years out of 24 from the OCCPI cohort, representing one of six (∼17%) patients <50 years and one of 45 patients (∼2%) <60 years in the combined cohorts. EC was the first/dual-first cancer in three patients with underlying constitutional MLH1 methylation. CONCLUSIONS: A correct diagnosis at first presentation of cancer is important as it will significantly alter clinical management. Screening for constitutional MLH1 methylation is warranted in patients with early-onset EC or synchronous/metachronous tumors (any age) displaying MLH1 methylation.