A Randomized Trial of Two Remote Health Care Delivery Models on the Uptake of Genetic Testing and Impact on Patient-Reported Psychological Outcomes in Families With Pancreatic Cancer: The Genetic Education, Risk Assessment, and Testing (GENERATE) Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Genetic testing uptake for cancer susceptibility in family members of patients with cancer is suboptimal. Among relatives of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), The GENetic Education, Risk Assessment, and TEsting (GENERATE) study evaluated 2 online genetic education/testing delivery models and their impact on patient-reported psychological outcomes. METHODS: Eligible participants had ≥1 first-degree relative with PDAC, or ≥1 first-/second-degree relative with PDAC with a known pathogenic germline variant in 1 of 13 PDAC predisposition genes. Participants were randomized by family, between May 8, 2019, and June 1, 2021. Arm 1 participants underwent a remote interactive telemedicine session and online genetic education. Arm 2 participants were offered online genetic education only. All participants were offered germline testing. The primary outcome was genetic testing uptake, compared by permutation tests and mixed-effects logistic regression models. We hypothesized that Arm 1 participants would have a higher genetic testing uptake than Arm 2. Validated surveys were administered to assess patient-reported anxiety, depression, and cancer worry at baseline and 3 months postintervention. RESULTS: A total of 424 families were randomized, including 601 participants (n = 296 Arm 1; n = 305 Arm 2), 90% of whom completed genetic testing (Arm 1 [87%]; Arm 2 [93%], P = .014). Arm 1 participants were significantly less likely to complete genetic testing compared with Arm 2 participants (adjusted ratio [Arm1/Arm2] 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.78-0.98). Among participants who completed patient-reported psychological outcomes questionnaires (Arm 1 [n = 194]; Arm 2 [n = 206]), the intervention did not affect mean anxiety, depression, or cancer worry scores. CONCLUSIONS: Remote genetic education and testing can be a successful and complementary option for delivering genetics care. (Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT03762590).

Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium: Accelerating Evidence-Based Practice of Genomic Medicine.

Despite rapid technical progress and demonstrable effectiveness for some types of diagnosis and therapy, much remains to be learned about clinical genome and exome sequencing (CGES) and its role within the practice of medicine. The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) consortium includes 18 extramural research projects, one National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) intramural project, and a coordinating center funded by the NHGRI and National Cancer Institute. The consortium is exploring analytic and clinical validity and utility, as well as the ethical, legal, and social implications of sequencing via multidisciplinary approaches; it has thus far recruited 5,577 participants across a spectrum of symptomatic and healthy children and adults by utilizing both germline and cancer sequencing. The CSER consortium is analyzing data and creating publically available procedures and tools related to participant preferences and consent, variant classification, disclosure and management of primary and secondary findings, health outcomes, and integration with electronic health records. Future research directions will refine measures of clinical utility of CGES in both germline and somatic testing, evaluate the use of CGES for screening in healthy individuals, explore the penetrance of pathogenic variants through extensive phenotyping, reduce discordances in public databases of genes and variants, examine social and ethnic disparities in the provision of genomics services, explore regulatory issues, and estimate the value and downstream costs of sequencing. The CSER consortium has established a shared community of research sites by using diverse approaches to pursue the evidence-based development of best practices in genomic medicine.

Stool DNA testing for the detection of pancreatic cancer: assessment of methylation marker candidates.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer (PanC) presents at late stage with high mortality. Effective early detection methods are needed. Aberrantly methylated genes are unexplored as markers for noninvasive detection by stool testing. The authors aimed to select discriminant methylated genes and to assess accuracy of these and mutant KRAS in stool to detect PanC. METHODS: Nine target genes were assayed by real-time methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction (MSP) in bisulfite-treated DNA from microdissected frozen specimens of 24 PanC cases and 30 normal colon controls. Archived stools from 58 PanC cases and 65 controls matched on sex, age, and smoking were analyzed. Target genes from fecal supernatants were enriched by hybrid capture, bisulfite-treated, and assayed by MSP. KRAS mutations were assayed using the QuARTS technique. RESULTS: Areas under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUCs) for tissue BMP3, NDRG4, EYA4, UCHL1, MDFI, Vimentin, CNTNAP2, SFRP2, and TFPI2 were 0.90, 0.79, 0.78, 0.78, 0.77, 0.77, 0.69, 0.67, and 0.66, respectively. The top 4 markers and mutant KRAS were evaluated in stool. BMP3 was the most discriminant methylation marker in stool. At 90% specificity, methylated BMP3 alone detected 51% of PanCs, mutant KRAS detected 50%, and combination detected 67%. AUCs for methylated BMP3, mutant KRAS, and combination in stool were 0.73, 0.75, and 0.85, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that stool assay of a methylated gene marker can detect PanC. Among candidate methylated markers discriminant in tissue, BMP3 alone performed well in stool. Combining methylated BMP3 and mutant KRAS increased stool detection over either marker alone.

Mayo Genome Consortia: a genotype-phenotype resource for genome-wide association studies with an application to the analysis of circulating bilirubin levels.

OBJECTIVE: To create a cohort for cost-effective genetic research, the Mayo Genome Consortia (MayoGC) has been assembled with participants from research studies across Mayo Clinic with high-throughput genetic data and electronic medical record (EMR) data for phenotype extraction. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Eligible participants include those who gave general research consent in the contributing studies to share high-throughput genotyping data with other investigators. Herein, we describe the design of the MayoGC, including the current participating cohorts, expansion efforts, data processing, and study management and organization. A genome-wide association study to identify genetic variants associated with total bilirubin levels was conducted to test the genetic research capability of the MayoGC. RESULTS: Genome-wide significant results were observed on 2q37 (top single nucleotide polymorphism, rs4148325; P=5.0 × 10(-62)) and 12p12 (top single nucleotide polymorphism, rs4363657; P=5.1 × 10(-8)) corresponding to a gene cluster of uridine 5'-diphospho-glucuronosyltransferases (the UGT1A cluster) and solute carrier organic anion transporter family, member 1B1 (SLCO1B1), respectively. CONCLUSION: Genome-wide association studies have identified genetic variants associated with numerous phenotypes but have been historically limited by inadequate sample size due to costly genotyping and phenotyping. Large consortia with harmonized genotype data have been assembled to attain sufficient statistical power, but phenotyping remains a rate-limiting factor in gene discovery research efforts. The EMR consists of an abundance of phenotype data that can be extracted in a relatively quick and systematic manner. The MayoGC provides a model of a unique collaborative effort in the environment of a common EMR for the investigation of genetic determinants of diseases.

Selection criteria for genetic assessment of patients with familial melanoma.

Approximately 5% to 10% of melanoma may be hereditary in nature, and about 2% of melanoma can be specifically attributed to pathogenic germline mutations in cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A). To appropriately identify the small proportion of patients who benefit most from referral to a genetics specialist for consideration of genetic testing for CDKN2A, we have reviewed available published studies of CDKN2A mutation analysis in cohorts with invasive, cutaneous melanoma and found variability in the rate of CDKN2A mutations based on geography, ethnicity, and the type of study and eligibility criteria used. Except in regions of high melanoma incidence, such as Australia, we found higher rates of CDKN2A positivity in individuals with 3 or more primary invasive melanomas and/or families with at least one invasive melanoma and two or more other diagnoses of invasive melanoma and/or pancreatic cancer among first- or second-degree relatives on the same side of the family. The work summarized in this review should help identify individuals who are appropriate candidates for referral for genetic consultation and possible testing.

Linkage analysis of chromosome 4 in families with familial pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 10% of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas have a familial basis. While a small portion of this familial clustering can be explained by inherited mutations in known genes (BRCA2, p16/CDKN2A, PRSS1, and STK11), the genetic basis for the majority of this familial clustering remains unknown. In addition, a pancreatic cancer susceptibility locus has been reported to be linked to chromosome 4q32-34 in a single family having a high penetrance of early-onset pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and pancreatic insufficiency. The goal of this study is to determine if linkage to chromosome 4q exists in our series of well-characterized families with idiopathic familial pancreatic cancer enrolled in the Pancreatic Cancer Genetic Epidemiology Consortium (PACGENE). METHODS: Parametric and nonparametric linkage analyses were performed using 21 microsatellite markers on chromosome 4 on affected individuals with pancreatic cancer from 42 familial pancreatic cancer kindreds. RESULTS: Markov Chain Monte Carlo parametric and nonparametric linkage analyses using SIMWALK2 as well as nonparametric linkage analysis using MERLIN did not provide strong evidence of linkage in this region (LOD < 1.0). Only one family provided a multipoint LOD score of >0.5 adjacent to the reported region. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support linkage to the 4q32-34 region in the majority of our familial pancreatic cancer kindreds. However, because multiple pancreatic cancer susceptibility genes are likely to exist, it is possible that a subset of the families in this study may be linked to this region.

Opportunities and barriers in the age of team science: strategies for success.

OBJECTIVE: To provide the voice of experience to investigators contemplating engagement in the realm of "team science". METHODS: Leaders were brought together from academia, government, and industry to share perspectives and insights based on real-life experiences. A panel discussion was held at the 2005 annual meeting of the American Association of Cancer Research. This article summarizes that forum. RESULTS: The panel focused on eight specific topics that were determined in advance to be the most important: the main justification for team science, funding team science, pre-arranged versus assigned partnerships, the role of novel technology with industrial partners, recognition for efforts and contribution in team science, budgets, keys to success when bridging disciplines and cultures, and balancing goals between academia and business. Although there were some differences of opinion, there were also a number of areas of agreement. Many practical suggestions were provided on how to succeed in the age of team science. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSION: The nature of scientific discovery in cancer research is increasingly requiring team science. Understanding the perspectives of academia, government, and business in this new world order is essential to successful navigation and, ultimately, major accomplishment in the effort to defeat the disease.

Immunohistochemistry versus microsatellite instability testing in phenotyping colorectal tumors.

PURPOSE: To compare microsatellite instability (MSI) testing with immunohistochemical (IHC) detection of hMLH1 and hMSH2 in colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Colorectal cancers from 1,144 patients were assessed for DNA mismatch repair deficiency by two methods: MSI testing and IHC detection of hMLH1 and hMSH2 gene products. High-frequency MSI (MSI-H) was defined as more than 30% instability of at least five markers; low-level MSI (MSI-L) was defined as 1% to 29% of loci unstable. RESULTS: Of 1,144 tumors tested, 818 showed intact expression of hMLH1 and hMSH2. Of these, 680 were microsatellite stable (MSS), 27 were MSI-H, and 111 were MSI-L. In all, 228 tumors showed absence of hMLH1 expression and 98 showed absence of hMSH2 expression: all were MSI-H. CONCLUSION: IHC in colorectal tumors for protein products hMLH1 and hMSH2 provides a rapid, cost-effective, sensitive (92.3%), and extremely specific (100%) method for screening for DNA mismatch repair defects. The predictive value of normal IHC for an MSS/MSI-L phenotype was 96.7%, and the predictive value of abnormal IHC was 100% for an MSI-H phenotype. Testing strategies must take into account acceptability of missing some cases of MSI-H tumors if only IHC is performed.