A video intervention to improve patient understanding of tumor genomic testing in patients with cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Tumor genomic testing (TGT) is standard-of-care for most patients with advanced/metastatic cancer. Despite established guidelines, patient education prior to TGT is frequently omitted. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a concise 4 min video for patient education prior to TGT. METHODS: Based on a quality improvement cycle, an animated video was created to be applicable to any cancer type, incorporating culturally diverse images, available in English and Spanish. Patients undergoing standard-of-care TGT were enrolled at a tertiary academic institution and completed survey instruments prior to video viewing (T1) and immediately post-viewing (T2). Instruments included: (1) 10-question objective genomic knowledge; (2) 10-question video message-specific knowledge; (3) 11-question Trust in Provider; (4) attitudes regarding TGT. RESULTS: A total of 150 participants were enrolled. For the primary objective, there was a significant increase in video message-specific knowledge (median 10 point increase; p < 0.0001) with no significant change in genomic knowledge/understanding (p = 0.89) or trust in physician/provider (p = 0.59). Results for five questions significantly improved, including the likelihood of TGT impact on treatment decision, incidental germline findings, and cost of testing. Improvement in video message-specific knowledge was consistent across demographic groups, including age, income, and education. CONCLUSIONS: A concise, 3-4 min, broadly applicable video incorporating culturally diverse images administered prior to TGT significantly improved video message-specific knowledge across all demographic groups. This resource is publicly available at http://www.tumor-testing.com, with a goal to efficiently educate and empower patients regarding TGT while addressing guidelines within the flow of clinical practice.

Cancer Risks for PMS2-Associated Lynch Syndrome.

PURPOSE: Lynch syndrome due to pathogenic variants in the DNA mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6 is predominantly associated with colorectal and endometrial cancer, although extracolonic cancers have been described within the Lynch tumor spectrum. However, the age-specific cumulative risk (penetrance) of these cancers is still poorly defined for PMS2-associated Lynch syndrome. Using a large data set from a worldwide collaboration, our aim was to determine accurate penetrance measures of cancers for carriers of heterozygous pathogenic PMS2 variants. METHODS: A modified segregation analysis was conducted that incorporated both genotyped and nongenotyped relatives, with conditioning for ascertainment to estimates corrected for bias. Hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% CIs were estimated for each cancer site for mutation carriers compared with the general population, followed by estimation of penetrance. RESULTS: In total, 284 families consisting of 4,878 first- and second-degree family members were included in the analysis. PMS2 mutation carriers were at increased risk for colorectal cancer (cumulative risk to age 80 years of 13% [95% CI, 7.9% to 22%] for males and 12% [95% CI, 6.7% to 21%] for females) and endometrial cancer (13% [95% CI, 7.0%-24%]), compared with the general population (6.6%, 4.7%, and 2.4%, respectively). There was no clear evidence of an increased risk of ovarian, gastric, hepatobiliary, bladder, renal, brain, breast, prostate, or small bowel cancer. CONCLUSION: Heterozygous PMS2 mutation carriers were at small increased risk for colorectal and endometrial cancer but not for any other Lynch syndrome-associated cancer. This finding justifies that PMS2-specific screening protocols could be restricted to colonoscopies. The role of risk-reducing hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for PMS2 mutation carriers needs further discussion.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Policy Statement Update: Genetic and Genomic Testing for Cancer Susceptibility.

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has long affirmed that the recognition and management of individuals with an inherited susceptibility to cancer are core elements of oncology care. ASCO released its first statement on genetic testing in 1996 and updated that statement in 2003 and 2010 in response to developments in the field. In 2014, the Cancer Prevention and Ethics Committees of ASCO commissioned another update to reflect the impact of advances in this area on oncology practice. In particular, there was an interest in addressing the opportunities and challenges arising from the application of massively parallel sequencing-also known as next-generation sequencing-to cancer susceptibility testing. This technology introduces a new level of complexity into the practice of cancer risk assessment and management, requiring renewed effort on the part of ASCO to ensure that those providing care to patients with cancer receive the necessary education to use this new technology in the most effective, beneficial manner. The purpose of this statement is to explore the challenges of new and emerging technologies in cancer genetics and provide recommendations to ensure their optimal deployment in oncology practice. Specifically, the statement makes recommendations in the following areas: germline implications of somatic mutation profiling, multigene panel testing for cancer susceptibility, quality assurance in genetic testing, education of oncology professionals, and access to cancer genetic services.

Use of Whole Genome Sequencing for Diagnosis and Discovery in the Cancer Genetics Clinic.

Despite the potential of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) to improve patient diagnosis and care, the empirical value of WGS in the cancer genetics clinic is unknown. We performed WGS on members of two cohorts of cancer genetics patients: those with BRCA1/2 mutations (n = 176) and those without (n = 82). Initial analysis of potentially pathogenic variants (PPVs, defined as nonsynonymous variants with allele frequency < 1% in ESP6500) in 163 clinically-relevant genes suggested that WGS will provide useful clinical results. This is despite the fact that a majority of PPVs were novel missense variants likely to be classified as variants of unknown significance (VUS). Furthermore, previously reported pathogenic missense variants did not always associate with their predicted diseases in our patients. This suggests that the clinical use of WGS will require large-scale efforts to consolidate WGS and patient data to improve accuracy of interpretation of rare variants. While loss-of-function (LoF) variants represented only a small fraction of PPVs, WGS identified additional cancer risk LoF PPVs in patients with known BRCA1/2 mutations and led to cancer risk diagnoses in 21% of non-BRCA cancer genetics patients after expanding our analysis to 3209 ClinVar genes. These data illustrate how WGS can be used to improve our ability to discover patients' cancer genetic risks.

ACG clinical guideline: Genetic testing and management of hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes.

This guideline presents recommendations for the management of patients with hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes. The initial assessment is the collection of a family history of cancers and premalignant gastrointestinal conditions and should provide enough information to develop a preliminary determination of the risk of a familial predisposition to cancer. Age at diagnosis and lineage (maternal and/or paternal) should be documented for all diagnoses, especially in first- and second-degree relatives. When indicated, genetic testing for a germline mutation should be done on the most informative candidate(s) identified through the family history evaluation and/or tumor analysis to confirm a diagnosis and allow for predictive testing of at-risk relatives. Genetic testing should be conducted in the context of pre- and post-test genetic counseling to ensure the patient's informed decision making. Patients who meet clinical criteria for a syndrome as well as those with identified pathogenic germline mutations should receive appropriate surveillance measures in order to minimize their overall risk of developing syndrome-specific cancers. This guideline specifically discusses genetic testing and management of Lynch syndrome, familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), attenuated familial adenomatous polyposis (AFAP), MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP), Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, juvenile polyposis syndrome, Cowden syndrome, serrated (hyperplastic) polyposis syndrome, hereditary pancreatic cancer, and hereditary gastric cancer.

Preliminary validation of a consumer-oriented colorectal cancer risk assessment tool compatible with the US Surgeon General's My Family Health Portrait.

PURPOSE: This study examines the analytic validity of a software tool designed to provide individuals with risk assessments for colorectal cancer based on personal health and family history information. The software is compatible with the US Surgeon General's My Family Health Portrait (MFHP). METHODS: An algorithm for risk assessment was created using accepted colorectal risk assessment guidelines and programmed into a software tool (MFHP). Risk assessments derived from 150 pedigrees using the MFHP tool were compared with "gold standard" risk assessments developed by three expert cancer genetic counselors. RESULTS: Genetic counselor risk assessments showed substantial, but not perfect, agreement. MFHP risk assessments for colorectal cancer yielded a sensitivity for colorectal cancer risk of 81% (95% confidence interval: 54-96%) and specificity of 90% (95% confidence interval: 83-94%), as compared with genetic counselor pedigree review. The positive predictive value for risk for MFHP was 48% (95% confidence interval: 29-68%), whereas the negative predictive value was 98% (95% confidence interval: 93-99%). Agreement between MFHP and genetic counselor pedigree review was moderate (κ = 0.54). CONCLUSION: The analytic validity of the MFHP colorectal cancer risk assessment software is similar to those of other types of screening tools used in primary care. Future investigations should explore the clinical validity and utility of the software in diverse population groups.Genet Med 17 9, 753-756.

Microsatellite instability detection by next generation sequencing.

BACKGROUND: Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a useful phenotype in cancer diagnosis and prognosis. Nevertheless, methods to detect MSI status from next generation DNA sequencing (NGS) data are underdeveloped. METHODS: We developed an approach to detect the MSI phenotype using NGS (mSINGS). The method was used to evaluate mononucleotide microsatellite loci that were incidentally sequenced after targeted gene enrichment and could be applied to gene or exome capture panels designed for other purposes. For each microsatellite locus, the number of differently sized repeats in experimental samples were quantified and compared to a population of normal controls. Loci were considered unstable if the experimental number of repeats was statistically greater than in the control population. MSI status was determined by the fraction of unstable microsatellite loci. RESULTS: We examined data from 324 samples generated using targeted gene capture assays of 3 different sizes, ranging from a 0.85-Mb to a 44-Mb exome design and incorporating from 15 to 2957 microsatellite markers. When we compared mSING results to MSI-PCR as a gold standard for 108 cases, we found the approach to be both diagnostically sensitive (range of 96.4% to 100% across 3 panels) and specific (range of 97.2% to 100%) for determining MSI status. The fraction of unstable microsatellite markers calculated from sequencing data correlated with the number of unstable loci detected by conventional MSI-PCR testing. CONCLUSIONS: NGS data can enable highly accurate detection of MSI, even from limited capture designs. This novel approach offers several advantages over existing PCR-based methods.

Reflex immunohistochemistry and microsatellite instability testing of colorectal tumors for Lynch syndrome among US cancer programs and follow-up of abnormal results.

PURPOSE: Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 protein expression and microsatellite instability (MSI) are well-established tools to screen for Lynch syndrome (LS). Although many cancer centers have adopted these tools as reflex LS screening after a colorectal cancer diagnosis, the standard of care has not been established, and no formal studies have described this practice in the United States. The purpose of this study was to describe prevalent practices regarding IHC/MSI reflex testing for LS in the United States and the subsequent follow-up of abnormal results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 12-item survey was developed after interdisciplinary expert input. A letter of invitation, survey, and online-survey option were sent to a contact at each cancer program. A modified Dillman strategy was used to maximize the response rate. The sample included 39 National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers (NCI-CCCs), 50 randomly selected American College of Surgeons-accredited Community Hospital Comprehensive Cancer Programs (COMPs), and 50 Community Hospital Cancer Programs (CHCPs). RESULTS: The overall response rate was 50%. Seventy-one percent of NCI-CCCs, 36% of COMPs, and 15% of CHCPs were conducting reflex IHC/MSI for LS; 48% of the programs used IHC, 14% of the programs used MSI, and 38% of the programs used both IHC and MSI. One program used a presurgical information packet, four programs offered an opt-out option, and none of the programs required written consent. CONCLUSION: Although most NCI-CCCs use reflex IHC/MSI to screen for LS, this practice is not well-adopted by community hospitals. These findings may indicate an emerging standard of care and diffusion from NCI-CCC to community cancer programs. Our findings also described an important trend away from requiring written patient consent for screening.

Evidence for heritable predisposition to epigenetic silencing of MLH1.

Epigenetic silencing of MLH1 is the most common cause of defective DNA mismatch repair in endometrial and colorectal cancers. We hypothesized that variation in the MLH1 gene might contribute to the risk for MLH1 methylation and epigenetic silencing. We undertook a case-control study to test for the association between MLH1 variants and abnormal MLH1 methylation. Eight MLH1 SNPs were typed in the normal DNA from women with endometrial carcinoma. For these studies, the cases were women whose cancers exhibited MLH1 methylation (N = 98) and the controls were women whose cancers had no MLH1 methylation (N = 219). One MLH1 SNP, rs1800734, located in the MLH1 CpG island at -93 from the translation start site, was significantly associated with MLH1 methylation as were age at diagnosis and patient body mass index. In validation experiments, a similar-sized cohort of colorectal carcinoma patients (N = 387) showed a similar degree of association with the -93 SNP; a smaller cohort of endometrial carcinomas (N = 181) showed no association. Combining all 3 cohorts showed an odds ratio of 1.61 (95% CI: 1.20-2.16) for the AA or AG vs. GG genotype at the -93 SNP. Identification of risk alleles for MLH1 methylation could shed light on mechanisms of epigenetic silencing and may ultimately lead to new approaches to the prevention or treatment of malignancies associated with MLH1 inactivation.

Genetic counselors: translating genomic science into clinical practice.

In a time of emerging genetic tests and technologies, genetic counselors are faced with the challenge of translating complex genomic data into information that will aid their client's ability to learn about, understand, make, and cope with decisions relating to genetic diagnoses. The first of two companion articles in this issue examines the role of the genetic counselor, particularly in counseling individuals at risk for or diagnosed with breast cancer, in an era of high-tech health care and gene patents.