Evaluation of Cancer-Based Criteria for Use in Mainstream BRCA1 and BRCA2 Genetic Testing in Patients With Breast Cancer.

Importance: Increasing BRCA1 and BRCA2 (collectively termed herein as BRCA) gene testing is required to improve cancer management and prevent BRCA-related cancers. Objective: To evaluate mainstream genetic testing using cancer-based criteria in patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: A quality improvement study and cost-effectiveness analysis of different BRCA testing selection criteria and access procedures to evaluate feasibility, acceptability, and mutation detection performance was conducted at the Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust as part of the Mainstreaming Cancer Genetics (MCG) Programme. Participants included 1184 patients with cancer who were undergoing genetic testing between September 1, 2013, and February 28, 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mutation rates, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were the primary outcomes. Results: Of the 1184 patients (1158 women [97.8%]) meeting simple cancer-based criteria, 117 had a BRCA mutation (9.9%). The mutation rate was similar in retrospective United Kingdom (10.2% [235 of 2294]) and prospective Malaysian (9.7% [103 of 1061]) breast cancer studies. If traditional family history criteria had been used, more than 50% of the mutation-positive individuals would have been missed. Of the 117 mutation-positive individuals, 115 people (98.3%) attended their genetics appointment and cascade to relatives is underway in all appropriate families (85 of 85). Combining with the equivalent ovarian cancer study provides 5 simple cancer-based criteria for BRCA testing with a 10% mutation rate: (1) ovarian cancer; (2) breast cancer diagnosed when patients are 45 years or younger; (3) 2 primary breast cancers, both diagnosed when patients are 60 years or younger; (4) triple-negative breast cancer; and (5) male breast cancer. A sixth criterion-breast cancer plus a parent, sibling, or child with any of the other criteria-can be added to address family history. Criteria 1 through 5 are considered the MCG criteria, and criteria 1 through 6 are considered the MCGplus criteria. Testing using MCG or MCGplus criteria is cost-effective with cost-effectiveness ratios of $1330 per discounted QALYs and $1225 per discounted QALYs, respectively, and appears to lead to cancer and mortality reductions (MCG: 804 cancers, 161 deaths; MCGplus: 1020 cancers, 204 deaths per year over 50 years). Use of MCG or MCGplus criteria might allow detection of all BRCA mutations in patients with breast cancer in the United Kingdom through testing one-third of patients. Feedback questionnaires from 259 patients and 23 cancer team members (12 oncologists, 8 surgeons, and 3 nurse specialists) showed acceptability of the process with 100% of patients pleased they had genetic testing and 100% of cancer team members confident to approve patients for genetic testing. Use of MCGplus criteria also appeared to be time and resource efficient, requiring 95% fewer genetic consultations than the traditional process. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that mainstream testing using simple, cancer-based criteria might be able to efficiently deliver consistent, cost-effective, patient-centered BRCA testing.

Identification of new Wilms tumour predisposition genes: an exome sequencing study.

BACKGROUND: Wilms tumour is the most common childhood renal cancer and is genetically heterogeneous. While several Wilms tumour predisposition genes have been identified, there is strong evidence that further predisposition genes are likely to exist. Our study aim was to identify new predisposition genes for Wilms tumour. METHODS: In this exome sequencing study, we analysed lymphocyte DNA from 890 individuals with Wilms tumour, including 91 affected individuals from 49 familial Wilms tumour pedigrees. We used the protein-truncating variant prioritisation method to prioritise potential disease-associated genes for further assessment. We evaluated new predisposition genes in exome sequencing data that we generated in 334 individuals with 27 other childhood cancers and in exome data from The Cancer Genome Atlas obtained from 7632 individuals with 28 adult cancers. FINDINGS: We identified constitutional cancer-predisposing mutations in 33 individuals with childhood cancer. The three identified genes with the strongest signal in the protein-truncating variant prioritisation analyses were TRIM28, FBXW7, and NYNRIN. 21 of 33 individuals had a mutation in TRIM28; there was a strong parent-of-origin effect, with all ten inherited mutations being maternally transmitted (p=0·00098). We also found a strong association with the rare epithelial subtype of Wilms tumour, with 14 of 16 tumours being epithelial or epithelial predominant. There were no TRIM28 mutations in individuals with other childhood or adult cancers. We identified truncating FBXW7 mutations in four individuals with Wilms tumour and a de-novo non-synonymous FBXW7 mutation in a child with a rhabdoid tumour. Biallelic truncating mutations in NYNRIN were identified in three individuals with Wilms tumour, which is highly unlikely to have occurred by chance (p<0·0001). Finally, we identified two de-novo KDM3B mutations, supporting the role of KDM3B as a childhood cancer predisposition gene. INTERPRETATION: The four new Wilms tumour predisposition genes identified-TRIM28, FBXW7, NYNRIN, and KDM3B-are involved in diverse biological processes and, together with the other 17 known Wilms tumour predisposition genes, account for about 10% of Wilms tumour cases. The overlap between these 21 constitutionally mutated predisposition genes and 20 genes somatically mutated in Wilms tumour is limited, consisting of only four genes. We recommend that all individuals with Wilms tumour should be offered genetic testing and particularly, those with epithelial Wilms tumour should be offered TRIM28 genetic testing. Only a third of the familial Wilms tumour clusters we analysed were attributable to known genes, indicating that further Wilms tumour predisposition factors await discovery. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust.

The Quality Sequencing Minimum (QSM): providing comprehensive, consistent, transparent next generation sequencing data quality assurance.

Next generation sequencing (NGS) is routinely used in clinical genetic testing. Quality management of NGS testing is essential to ensure performance is consistently and rigorously evaluated. Three primary metrics are used in NGS quality evaluation: depth of coverage, base quality and mapping quality. To provide consistency and transparency in the utilisation of these metrics we present the Quality Sequencing Minimum (QSM). The QSM defines the minimum quality requirement a laboratory has selected for depth of coverage (C), base quality (B) and mapping quality (M) and can be applied per base, exon, gene or other genomic region, as appropriate. The QSM format is CX_BY(P Y)_MZ(P Z). X is the parameter threshold for C, Y the parameter threshold for B, P Y the percentage of reads that must reach Y, Z the parameter threshold for M, P Z the percentage of reads that must reach Z. The data underlying the QSM is in the BAM file, so a QSM can be easily and automatically calculated in any NGS pipeline. We used the QSM to optimise cancer predisposition gene testing using the TruSight Cancer Panel (TSCP). We set the QSM as C50_B10(85)_M20(95). Test regions falling below the QSM were automatically flagged for review, with 100/1471 test regions QSM-flagged in multiple individuals. Supplementing these regions with 132 additional probes improved performance in 85/100. We also used the QSM to optimise testing of genes with pseudogenes such as PTEN and PMS2. In TSCP data from 960 individuals the median number of regions that passed QSM per sample was 1429 (97%).  Importantly, the QSM can be used at an individual report level to provide succinct, comprehensive quality assurance information about individual test performance. We believe many laboratories would find the QSM useful. Furthermore, widespread adoption of the QSM would facilitate consistent, transparent reporting of genetic test performance by different laboratories.

CoverView: a sequence quality evaluation tool for next generation sequencing data.

Quality assurance and quality control are essential for robust next generation sequencing (NGS). Here we present CoverView, a fast, flexible, user-friendly quality evaluation tool for NGS data. CoverView processes mapped sequencing reads and user-specified regions to report depth of coverage, base and mapping quality metrics with increasing levels of detail from a chromosome-level summary to per-base profiles. CoverView can flag regions that do not fulfil user-specified quality requirements, allowing suboptimal data to be systematically and automatically presented for review. It also provides an interactive graphical user interface (GUI) that can be opened in a web browser and allows intuitive exploration of results. We have integrated CoverView into our accredited clinical cancer predisposition gene testing laboratory that uses the TruSight Cancer Panel (TSCP). CoverView has been invaluable for optimisation and quality control of our testing pipeline, providing transparent, consistent quality metric information and automatic flagging of regions that fall below quality thresholds. We demonstrate this utility with TSCP data from the Genome in a Bottle reference sample, which CoverView analysed in 13 seconds. CoverView uses data routinely generated by NGS pipelines, reads standard input formats, and rapidly creates easy-to-parse output text (.txt) files that are customised by a simple configuration file. CoverView can therefore be easily integrated into any NGS pipeline. CoverView and detailed documentation for its use are freely available at github.com/RahmanTeamDevelopment/CoverView/releases and www.icr.ac.uk/CoverView.

The ICR639 CPG NGS validation series: A resource to assess analytical sensitivity of cancer predisposition gene testing.

The analytical sensitivity of a next generation sequencing (NGS) test reflects the ability of the test to detect real sequence variation. The evaluation of analytical sensitivity relies on the availability of gold-standard, validated, benchmarking datasets. For NGS analysis the availability of suitable datasets has been limited. Most laboratories undertake small scale evaluations using in-house data, and/or rely on in silico generated datasets to evaluate the performance of NGS variant detection pipelines. Cancer predisposition genes (CPGs), such as BRCA1 and BRCA2, are amongst the most widely tested genes in clinical practice today. Hundreds of providers across the world are now offering CPG testing using NGS methods. Validating and comparing the analytical sensitivity of CPG tests has proved difficult, due to the absence of comprehensive, orthogonally validated, benchmarking datasets of CPG pathogenic variants. To address this we present the ICR639 CPG NGS validation series. This dataset comprises data from 639 individuals. Each individual has sequencing data generated using the TruSight Cancer Panel (TSCP), a targeted NGS assay for the analysis of CPGs, together with orthogonally generated data showing the presence of at least one CPG pathogenic variant per individual. The set consists of 645 pathogenic variants in total. There is strong representation of the most challenging types of variants to detect, with 339 indels, including 16 complex indels and 24 with length greater than five base pairs and 74 exon copy number variations (CNVs) including 23 single exon CNVs. The series includes pathogenic variants in 31 CPGs, including 502 pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2, making this an important comprehensive validation dataset for providers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 NGS testing. We have deposited the TSCP FASTQ files of the ICR639 series in the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA) under accession number EGAD00001004134.