Implementing digital systems to facilitate genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: An observational study of 4 clinical workflows.

PURPOSE: National efforts have prioritized the identification of effective methods for increasing case ascertainment and delivery of evidence-based health care for individuals at elevated risk for hereditary cancers. METHODS: This study examined the uptake of genetic counseling and testing following the use of a digital cancer genetic risk assessment program implemented at 27 health care sites in 10 states using 1 of 4 clinical workflows: (1) traditional referral, (2) point-of-care scheduling, (3) point-of-care counseling/telegenetics, and (4) point-of-care testing. RESULTS: In 2019, 102,542 patients were screened and 33,113 (32%) were identified as at high risk and meeting National Comprehensive Cancer Network genetic testing criteria for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome, or both. Among those identified at high risk, 5147 (16%) proceeded with genetic testing. Genetic counseling uptake was 11% among the sites with workflows that included seeing a genetic counselor before testing, with 88% of patients proceeding with genetic testing after counseling. Uptake of genetic testing across sites varied significantly by clinical workflow (6% referral, 10% point-of-care scheduling, 14% point-of-care counseling/telegenetics, and 35% point-of-care testing, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Study findings highlight the potential heterogeneity of effectiveness attributable to different care delivery approaches for implementing digital hereditary cancer risk screening programs.

The Approach to Performance of Quality Upper Endoscopy in Lynch Syndrome (QUELS): An International Expert Statement.

Strong evidence demonstrates the protective benefit of frequent colonoscopy surveillance for colorectal cancer prevention in Lynch Syndrome (LS) and is endorsed by many guidelines. Until recently, the evidence supporting the utility of upper endoscopy [esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD)] for upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer surveillance was limited. Over the last 3 years, multiple studies have demonstrated that EGD surveillance in LS is associated with the detection of both precancerous lesions and early-stage UGI cancers. On the basis of the emerging favorable evidence derived from EGD surveillance programs, the 2022 National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines for LS recommend UGI surveillance with EGD starting between age 30 and 40 years with repeat EGDs every 2 to 4 years, preferably in conjunction with colonoscopy, in all patients with a germline pathogenic variant (PV) in MLH1, MSH2, EPCAM, and MSH6 and, because of the lack of data, consideration in PMS2. Standardization of the approach to performing EGD surveillance in LS and reporting clinically actionable findings is requisite for both improving quality and understanding the cost efficiency and outcomes of patients undergoing EGD as a surveillance tool. Accordingly, the primary objective of this Quality of Upper Endoscopy in Lynch Syndrome (QUELS) statement is to articulate a framework for standardizing the approach to performing and reporting EGD findings in patients with LS by introducing emerging quality metrics. The recommendations presented herein were developed from available evidence and consensus-based expert opinion and provide a practical approach for clinicians applying EGD surveillance in accordance with the most recent and existing LS guidelines.

Clinical implications of genetic testing in familial intermediate and late-onset colorectal cancer.

The genetic background of familial, late-onset colorectal cancer (CRC) (i.e., onset > age 50 years) has not been studied as thoroughly as other subgroups of familial CRC, and the proportion of families with a germline genetic predisposition to CRC remains to be defined. To define the contribution of known or suggested CRC predisposition genes to familial late-onset CRC, we analyzed 32 well-established or candidate CRC predisposition genes in 75 families with late-onset CRC. We identified pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in five patients in MSH6 (n = 1), MUTYH (monoallelic; n = 2) and NTHL1 (monoallelic; n = 2). In addition, we identified a number of variants of unknown significance in particular in the lower penetrant Lynch syndrome-associated mismatch repair (MMR) gene MSH6 (n = 6). In conclusion, screening using a comprehensive cancer gene panel in families with accumulation of late-onset CRC appears not to have a significant clinical value due to the low level of high-risk pathogenic variants detected. Our data suggest that only patients with abnormal MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC) or microsatellite instability (MSI) analyses, suggestive of Lynch syndrome, or a family history indicating another cancer predisposition syndrome should be prioritized for such genetic evaluations. Variants in MSH6 and MUTYH have previously been proposed to be involved in digenic or oligogenic hereditary predisposition to CRC. Accumulation of variants in MSH6 and monoallelic, pathogenic variants in MUTYH in our study indicates that digenic or oligogenic inheritance might be involved in late-onset CRC and warrants further studies of complex types of inheritance.

Prenatal genetic counseling practices regarding recommendations for cancer genetic counseling: A retrospective chart review from two academic institutions.

Prenatal and preconception genetic counselors are trained to take patient pedigrees to evaluate for potential risks for genetic conditions, including hereditary cancer syndromes. However, little research has been published on how often prenatal/preconception genetic counselors provide recommendations for cancer genetic counseling solely based on a family history of cancer. Therefore, this study sought to (a) characterize the types of cancers recognized for a cancer genetic counseling recommendation, (b) analyze appointment indications associated with discussion documentation, and (c) investigate how often National Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCCN) genetic testing criteria for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer syndrome (HBOC) and Lynch syndrome were met and how often a recommendation for cancer genetic counseling was made. A retrospective chart review and pedigree analysis were performed for prenatal/preconception genetic counseling patients with a family history of cancer seen at two academic institutions between August 10, 2019, and December 1, 2019. In the 170 charts included, a recommendation for cancer genetic counseling was documented in 40% of all genetic counseling summaries and in 59.2% of summaries when NCCN genetic testing criteria for HBOC and/or Lynch syndrome was met. Using chi-squared and logistic regression analysis, these data support that individuals were significantly more likely to receive a recommendation when NCCN genetic testing criteria were met (OR = 5.01, p < .001) or when the family history contained two or more types of cancer (OR = 2.24, p = .02). Overall, this study identified the NCCN genetic testing criteria for HBOC and Lynch syndrome for which recommendations for cancer genetic counseling were commonly missed. This characterization suggests that continuing education for prenatal and preconception genetic counselors on updated NCCN guidelines may be helpful for improving rates of cancer genetic counseling referrals, uptake of genetic testing, and cancer screening recommendations.

Review article: Lynch Syndrome-a mechanistic and clinical management update.

BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome (LS) is an autosomal dominant familial condition caused by a pathogenic variant (PV) in a DNA mismatch repair gene, which then predisposes carriers to various cancers. AIM: To review the pathogenesis, clinical presentation, differential diagnosis and clinical strategies for detection and management of LS. METHODS: A narrative review synthesising knowledge from published literature, as well as current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for management of LS was conducted. RESULTS: LS tumours are characterised by unique pathogenesis, ultimately resulting in hypermutation, microsatellite instability and high immunogenicity that has significant implications for cancer risk, clinical presentation, treatment and surveillance. LS is one of the most common hereditary causes of cancer, and about 1 in 279 individuals carry a PV in an LS gene that predisposes to associated cancers. Individuals with LS have increased risks for colorectal, endometrial and other cancers, with significant variation in lifetime risk by LS-associated gene. CONCLUSIONS: As genetic testing becomes more widespread, the number of individuals identified with LS is expected to increase in the population. Understanding the pathogenesis of LS informs current strategies for detection and clinical management, and also guides future areas for clinical innovation. Unravelling the mechanisms by which these tumours evolve may help to more precisely tailor management by the gene involved.

Efficacy of paired tumor and germline testing in evaluation of patients with Lynch-like syndrome in a large integrated healthcare setting.

Patients with mismatch repair (MMR) deficient colorectal cancer (CRC) without detectable germline pathogenic variants (PVs) or likely pathogenic variants (LPVs) in MMR genes are often labeled as Lynch-like syndrome (LLS). We sought to evaluate the efficacy of paired tumor and germline testing in risk stratification of patients with LLS in a large, community-based, integrated healthcare setting. Through the universal screening program for Lynch syndrome at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, we identified all patients with MMR deficient colorectal tumors without detectable germline PVs or LPVs between April 2011 and October 2018. These patients were categorized as LLS and were offered paired tumor and germline testing. Risk stratification and patient management were assessed upon completion of all testing. Of the 50 patients with LLS who underwent paired tumor and germline testing, 62% (n = 31) were categorized as sporadic, 6% (n = 3) had Lynch syndrome, and 32% (n = 16) remained inconclusive. Among the sporadic cases, 65% (n = 20) had a PV (n = 18) or LPV (n = 2) in combination with loss of heterozygosity while 35% (n = 11) had two somatic PVs/LPVs involving the same MMR gene. Our findings showed paired tumor and germline testing resolved the etiology in the majority of patients and is a valuable strategy in risk stratification and management of patients with LLS. Further studies are needed to assess the optimal application of paired testing in different practice settings, particularly with evolving technology and decreasing cost of molecular sequencing.

Implementation of Universal Colorectal Cancer Screening for Lynch Syndrome in Hispanics Living in Puerto Rico.

OBJECTIVE: Colorectal cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in Puerto Rico and third among Hispanics in the USA. Up to 2-4% of colorectal cancer cases are a result of Lynch syndrome (LS), a hereditary cancer syndrome caused by a germline mutation in at least one of the DNA mismatch repair genes. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of LS in colorectal tumors during the first 15-months after the implementation of universal tumor-based screening for LS in Puerto Rico. METHODS: A total of 317 colorectal tumors were evaluated in a large private pathology laboratory from September 2014 to December 2015. Clinical characteristics were obtained from the pathology reports. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models were used to estimate the magnitude of association (odds ratio [OR] with 95% confidence intervals [CI]) between absent MMR protein expression and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Most cases (93.4%) were analyzed by immunohistochemistry; 11.8% (35 of 296) had deficient mismatch repair protein expression. While 29 of the 317 cases were subjected to PCR-based microsatellite instability analysis of which 10.3% (3 of 317) had microsatellite instability. In total, 11.0% of the tumors were reported MMR deficient. These tumors were more likely from females and more likely localized in the proximal colon compared to those with proficient MMR expression. CONCLUSIONS: Our data is consistent with the results from other studies including US Hispanics, where approximately 10% of Hispanic individuals with colorectal cancer have microsatellite instability. Our results support universal tumor-based screening for LS among Hispanics in accordance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines.

Comparison of two Lynch screening strategies in endometrial cancer in a California health system.

OBJECTIVE: Compare detection of Lynch syndrome in endometrial cancer between regions of a health care system with different screening strategies. METHODS: A retrospective study of endometrial cancer (EC) cases from 2 regions of an integrated health care system (Kaiser Permanente Northern (KPNC) and Southern (KPSC) California). Within KPNC, immunohistochemistry tumor screening (IHC) was physician ordered and risk-based; within KPSC, IHC was universal and automated. Clinical risk factors associated with abnormal IHC and Lynch Syndrome (LS) were identified. RESULTS: During the study, there were 2045 endometrial cancers: 1399 in the physician-order group and 646 in the universal testing group. In the physician-order group: among women < age 60, 34% underwent IHC; 9.6% were abnormal, and 3% were possible LS after methylation testing; among women ≥60, 11% underwent IHC, 3% were abnormal and <1% were possible LS. In the universal group, 87% of women age <60 had IHC, 19.4% were abnormal, and 6% were possible LS; Among women age ≥60, 82% underwent IHC, 26% were abnormal, and 2% were possible LS. There were no differences in LS cases between the physician-order group and the universal group in either age strata (<60: 3% vs. 3.6%, p=0.62; ≥60: <1% vs. 1%, p=0.63) Factors associated with LS were younger age (odds ratio (OR) 0.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04-0.29) and lower body mass index (BMI), (OR 0.38 95% CI 0.18-0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Universal IHC screening did not result in increased LS detection in EC.

Rationale for evaluating breast cancers of Lynch syndrome patients for mismatch repair gene expression.

BACKGROUND: Lynch Syndrome (LS) patients harbor germline mutations in one of several mismatch repair (MMR) genes and are predisposed to the development of colon and endometrial cancers and multiple other cancers types as well. Tumors related to LS are characterized by deficient protein expression of one or more MMR genes (dMMR) and/or demonstrate high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) (Win et al. in Breast Cancer Res 15(2):R27, 2013). The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guideline states that there have been "suggestions" of increased risk of breast cancer in diagnosed LS patients, but does not endorse "increased screening above-average-risk breast cancer screening recommendations" for patients with LS (Provenzale et al. in J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 14(8):1010-1030, 2019). RESULTS: This report describes a molecularly diagnosed LS patient who developed a dMMR breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Sporadic dMMR breast cancers are extremely rare (Davies et al. in Cancer Res 77:4755-4762, 2017). It seems reasonable to conclude that identifying a dMMR breast cancer in a patient with known LS strongly suggests that her LS is breast cancer-predisposing. LS patients with dMMR breast cancers might therefore be considered for above-average breast cancer screening for the development of additional breast cancers. Also, the FDA recently granted approval of checkpoint inhibitor therapy for all metastatic dMMR solid malignancies (Lemery et al. in N Engl J Med 377:1409-1412, 2017). MMR expression assays in metastatic breast cancers of LS patients would represent a more focused approach to identifying patients with breast cancers who are potentially eligible for checkpoint inhibitor therapy than would be universal MMR testing of all metastatic breast cancers.

Implementation of a Systematic Tumor Screening Program for Lynch Syndrome in an Integrated Health Care Setting.

A subset of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases are attributable to Lynch syndrome (LS), a hereditary form of CRC. Effective evaluation for LS can be done on CRC tumors to guide diagnostic testing. Increased diagnosis of LS allows for surveillance and risk reduction, which can mitigate CRC-related burden and prevent cancer-related deaths. We evaluated participation in LS screening among newly diagnosed adult CRC patients. Some cases were referred for genetics evaluation prior to study recruitment (selective screening). Those not referred directly were randomized to the intervention or control (usual care) arms. Control cases were observed for one year, then given information about LS screening. Patients who declined participation were followed through the medical record. Of 601 cases of CRC, 194 (32%) enrolled in our study and were offered LS screening, 43 (7%) were followed as a control group, 148 (25%) declined participation and 216 (36%) were ineligible [63 (10%) of which received prior selective screening]. Six and nine cases of LS were identified through the intervention and selective screening groups, respectively. Overall, a higher proportion of PMS2 variants were identified in the intervention (3/6, 50%) versus selective screening groups (2/9, 22%) (not statistically significant). Eighty-eight percent and 23% of intervention and control patients, respectively, received LS screening. No control patients were found to have LS. Systems-based approaches are needed to ensure we fully identify LS cases. The proportion of LS cases from this program was 4% of newly diagnosed cases of CRC, similar to other programs.

Microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer: overview of its clinical significance and novel perspectives.

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a key biomarker in colorectal cancer (CRC), with crucial diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive implications. Testing for mismatch repair deficiency (MMR-D)/MSI is recommended during screening for Lynch syndrome, an autosomal-dominant hereditary disease that is characterized by germline mutations in the MMR genes and associated with an increased risk for several types of cancer. Additionally, MSI-high (MSI-H) status is associated with a better prognosis in early-stage CRC and a lack of benefit from adjuvant treatment with 5-fluorouracil in stage II disease. More recently, MSI has emerged as a predictor of sensitivity to immunotherapy-based treatments. The groundbreaking success of checkpoint inhibitors in MMR-D metastatic CRC has opened a new therapeutic scenario for patients with these tumors. MSI-H CRC, in both the sporadic and hereditary settings, is characterized by distinctive molecular and clinicopathologic features and represents a unique subset of CRC that is the object of growing interest and fervent research efforts. This article, an overview of the expanding role of MSI in CRC, covers its clinical significance, the available data on molecular profiling, novel perspectives on MSI testing, biomarkers in MSI-H CRC, immunotherapy resistance, and novel immunotherapy strategies.

Outcome of genetic evaluation of patients with kidney cancer referred for suspected hereditary cancer syndromes.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze patients with kidney cancer referred for evaluation at a high-volume genetics service at a comprehensive cancer center and identify factors associated with positive tests for hereditary cancer syndromes. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients referred to the Clinical Genetics Service at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center was performed, and patients with a personal history of kidney cancer were identified. Patient and disease characteristics were reviewed. In all, 4 variables including age at diagnosis of kidney tumor, presence of syndromic manifestations, family history of kidney cancer, and number of primary malignancies were evaluated for association with positive test results in 2 groups: patients tested for renal cell carcinoma syndromes and Lynch syndrome. Guidance for genetic testing strategy in patients with kidney cancer is provided. RESULTS: Between 1999 and 2012, 120 patients with a history of kidney cancer were evaluated by the Clinical Genetics Service. The mean age at kidney cancer diagnosis was 52 years (interquartile range: 42-63), with 57% being women. A family history of kidney cancer was reported by 39 patients (33%). Time between diagnosis of first cancer and genetic consultation was <1 year in 54%, 2 to 5 years in 23%, and>5 years in the remaining 23%. Overall, 95 patients were tested for genetic abnormalities with 27 (28%) testing positive. Testing for renal cell carcinoma (RCC)-related syndromes was performed on 43 patients, with 13 testing positive (30%). Lynch syndrome testing was positive in 9 patients (32%) after 28 were tested. In RCC-associated syndromes, young age of diagnosis was associated with positive test results. Conversely, syndromic manifestations and increasing number of primary malignancies were associated with positive Lynch testing. CONCLUSIONS: The discovery of inherited kidney cancer syndromes has provided a unique opportunity to identify patients at increased risk for cancer. Factors associated with positive genetic testing are unique to different syndromes. These data suggest that in kidney cancer patients evaluated for hereditary cancer syndromes, young age is associated with diagnosis of RCC syndromes, whereas syndromic manifestations and multiple primaries are found in Lynch syndrome. These results, along with clinical awareness, may be useful for practicing urologists to select patients with kidney cancer to refer for genetic counseling.

Stakeholder perspectives on implementing a universal Lynch syndrome screening program: a qualitative study of early barriers and facilitators.

PURPOSE: Evidence-based guidelines recommend that all newly diagnosed colon cancer be screened for Lynch syndrome (LS), but best practices for implementing universal tumor screening have not been extensively studied. We interviewed a range of stakeholders in an integrated health-care system to identify initial factors that might promote or hinder the successful implementation of a universal LS screening program. METHODS: We conducted interviews with health-plan leaders, managers, and staff. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis began with a grounded approach and was also guided by the Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM). RESULTS: We completed 14 interviews with leaders/managers and staff representing involved clinical and health-plan departments. Although stakeholders supported the concept of universal screening, they identified several internal (organizational) and external (environment) factors that promote or hinder implementation. Facilitating factors included perceived benefits of screening for patients and organization, collaboration between departments, and availability of organizational resources. Barriers were also identified, including: lack of awareness of guidelines, lack of guideline clarity, staffing and program "ownership" concerns, and cost uncertainties. Analysis also revealed nine important infrastructure-type considerations for successful implementation. CONCLUSION: We found that clinical, laboratory, and administrative departments supported universal tumor screening for LS. Requirements for successful implementation may include interdepartmental collaboration and communication, patient and provider/staff education, and significant infrastructure and resource support related to laboratory processing and systems for electronic ordering and tracking.

Initial Results of Multigene Panel Testing for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer and Lynch Syndrome.

Multigene panel testing for hereditary cancer risk has recently become commercially available; however, the impact of its use on patient care is undefined. We sought to evaluate results from implementation of panel testing in a multidisciplinary cancer center. We performed a retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing genetic testing after initiating use of multigene panel testing at Loma Linda University Medical Center. From February 13 to August 25, 2014, 92 patients were referred for genetic testing based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Testing was completed in 90 patients. Overall, nine (10%) pathogenic mutations were identified: five BRCA1/2, and four in non-BRCA loci. Single-site testing identified one BRCA1 and one BRCA2 mutation. The remaining mutations were identified by use of panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. There were 40 variants of uncertain significance identified in 34 patients. The use of panel testing more than doubled the identification rate of clinically significant pathogenic mutations that would have been missed with BRCA testing alone. The large number of variants of uncertain significance identified will require long-term follow-up for potential reclassification. Multigene panel testing provides additional information that may improve patient outcomes.

Availability and scope of integrated screening for patients with Lynch syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the availability and capacity of US-based integrated centers for the management of Lynch syndrome. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of practice patterns in the care of patients with Lynch syndrome was conducted at 33 National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers in the USA from March 1 to June 1, 2013. Each cancer center was contacted by telephone and the caller used a uniform scripted greeting and survey format. RESULTS: All centers routinely recommended colonoscopy. Other recommended screening modalities were hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (29/33; 88%), endoscopy (27/33; 82%), urinalysis (23/33; 70%), endometrial sampling (21/33; 64%), dermatologic examination (19/32; 59%), pelvic ultrasonography (18/33; 55%), serum CA125 level (14/33; 42%), urine cytology (14/33; 42%), computed tomography (1/33; 3%), and magnetic resonance imaging (1/33; 3%). Each center had a multidisciplinary team but the composition varied. A designated team leader was present at 21 centers (64%). Having a team leader was associated with an increased likelihood of recommending endoscopy (P=0.04) and dermatologic surveillance (P=0.01). Only 23 centers (70%) had a system in place for communicating follow-up with patients. CONCLUSION: The lack of consensus in practice patterns recorded among participating centers probably reflected the limited existing evidence on the usefulness of most screening modalities.

Identification of a Variety of Mutations in Cancer Predisposition Genes in Patients With Suspected Lynch Syndrome.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Multigene panels are commercially available tools for hereditary cancer risk assessment that allow for next-generation sequencing of numerous genes in parallel. However, it is not clear if these panels offer advantages over traditional genetic testing. We investigated the number of cancer predisposition gene mutations identified by parallel sequencing in individuals with suspected Lynch syndrome. METHODS: We performed germline analysis with a 25-gene, next-generation sequencing panel using DNA from 1260 individuals who underwent clinical genetic testing for Lynch syndrome from 2012 through 2013. All patients had a history of Lynch syndrome-associated cancer and/or polyps. We classified all identified germline alterations for pathogenicity and calculated the frequencies of pathogenic mutations and variants of uncertain clinical significance (VUS). We also analyzed data on patients' personal and family history of cancer, including fulfillment of clinical guidelines for genetic testing. RESULTS: Of the 1260 patients, 1112 met National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for Lynch syndrome testing (88%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 86%-90%). Multigene panel testing identified 114 probands with Lynch syndrome mutations (9.0%; 95% CI, 7.6%-10.8%) and 71 with mutations in other cancer predisposition genes (5.6%; 95% CI, 4.4%-7.1%). Fifteen individuals had mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2; 93% of these met the NCCN criteria for Lynch syndrome testing and 33% met NCCN criteria for BRCA1 and BRCA2 analysis (P = .0017). An additional 9 individuals carried mutations in other genes linked to high lifetime risks of cancer (5 had mutations in APC, 3 had bi-allelic mutations in MUTYH, and 1 had a mutation in STK11); all of these patients met NCCN criteria for Lynch syndrome testing. A total of 479 individuals had 1 or more VUS (38%; 95% CI, 35%-41%). CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with suspected Lynch syndrome, multigene panel testing identified high-penetrance mutations in cancer predisposition genes, many of which were unexpected based on patients' histories. Parallel sequencing also detected a high number of potentially uninformative germline findings, including VUS.

Population-Based Lynch Syndrome Screening by Microsatellite Instability in Patients ≤50: Prevalence, Testing Determinants, and Result Availability Prior to Colon Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: As there are no US population-based studies examining Lynch syndrome (LS) screening frequency by microsatellite instability (MSI) and immunohistochemistry (IHC), we seek to quantitate statewide rates in patients aged ≤50 years using data from a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-funded Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) project and identify factors associated with testing. Screening rates in this young, high-risk population may provide a best-case scenario as older patients, potentially deemed lower risk, may undergo testing less frequently. We also seek to determine how frequently MSI/IHC results are available preoperatively, as this may assist with decisions regarding colonic resection extent. METHODS: Data from all Louisiana colorectal cancer (CRC) patients aged ≤50 years diagnosed in 2011 were obtained from the Louisiana Tumor Registry CER project. Registry researchers and physicians analyzed data, including pathology and MSI/IHC. RESULTS: Of the 2,427 statewide all-age CRC patients, there were 274 patients aged ≤50 years, representing health care at 61 distinct facilities. MSI and/or IHC were performed in 23.0% of patients. Testing-associated factors included CRC family history (P<0.0045), urban location (P<0.0370), and care at comprehensive cancer centers (P<0.0020) but not synchronous/metachronous CRC or MSI-like histology. Public hospital screening was disproportionately low (P<0.0217). Of those tested, MSI and/or IHC was abnormal in 21.7%. Of those with abnormal IHC, staining patterns were consistent with LS in 87.5%. MSI/IHC results were available preoperatively in 16.9% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Despite frequently abnormal MSI/IHC results, LS screening in young, high-risk patients is low. Provider education and disparities in access to specialized services, particularly in underserved populations, are possible contributors. MSI/IHC results are infrequently available preoperatively.

Hereditary cancer-associated mutations in women diagnosed with two primary cancers: an opportunity to identify hereditary cancer syndromes after the first cancer diagnosis.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with hereditary cancer syndromes are at high risk for a second primary cancer. Early identification of these patients after an initial cancer diagnosis is the key to implementing cancer risk-reducing strategies. METHODS: A commercial laboratory database was searched for women with a history of both breast and ovarian or colorectal and endometrial cancer who underwent genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) or Lynch syndrome (LS). RESULTS: Among women with both breast and ovarian cancer, 22.4% (2,237/9,982) had a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Among women with both colorectal and ovarian cancer, 28.1% (264/941) had a mutation associated with LS. In 66.6% of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers and in 58.3% of LS mutation carriers, >5 years passed between the cancer diagnoses. Of patients with HBOC and LS, 56 and 65.2%, respectively, met the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for hereditary cancer testing after their initial diagnosis based on their personal cancer history alone. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial number of women tested for LS or HBOC after being diagnosed with two successive primary cancers were diagnosed with a hereditary cancer syndrome. In many cases, the time interval between the diagnoses was long enough to allow for the implementation of surveillance and/or prophylactic measures.

Impact of age cutoffs on a lynch syndrome screening program.

PURPOSE: To determine the impact of applying an age cutoff to tumor-based Lynch syndrome (LS) screening, specifically focusing on changes in relative effectiveness, efficiency, and cost. The project was undertaken to answer questions about implementation of the LS screening program in an integrated health care delivery system. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical data extracted from an internal cancer registry, previous modeling efforts, published literature, and gray data were used to populate decision models designed to answer questions about the impact of age cutoffs in LS screening. Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) were stratified at 10-year intervals from ages 50 to 80 years and compared with no age cutoff. Outcomes are reported for a cohort of 325 patients screened and includes total cost to screen, LS cases present in the cutoff category, number of LS cases expected to be identified by screening, cost per LS case detected, and total number and percentage of LS cases missed. CONCLUSION: Applying an age cutoff to an LS screening program has considerable potential for decreasing total screening costs and increasing efficiency, but at a loss of effectiveness. Imposing an age cutoff of 50 years reduces the cost of the screening program to 16% of a program with no age cutoff, but at the expense of missing more than half of the cases. Failure to identify LS cases is magnified by a cascade effect in family members. The results of this analysis influenced the final policy in our system.

Underutilization of Lynch syndrome screening in a multisite study of patients with colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to examine Lynch syndrome screening of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in integrated health-care-delivery organizations. METHODS: We determined the availability of Lynch syndrome screening criteria and actual Lynch syndrome screening in the medical records of 1,188 patients diagnosed with metastatic colorectal cancer between 2004 and 2009 at seven institutions in the Cancer Research Network. RESULTS: We found infrequent use of Lynch syndrome screening (41/1,188). Family history was available for 937 of the 1,188 patients (79%). There was sufficient information to assess Lynch syndrome risk using family history-based criteria in 719 of the 937 patients (77%) with family history documentation. In 391 individuals with a family history of a Lynch syndrome-associated cancer, 107 (27%) could not be evaluated due to missing information such as age of cancer onset. Eleven percent of patients who met the Bethesda criteria and 25% of individuals who met the Amsterdam II criteria were screened for Lynch syndrome. Recommended guidelines were adhered to during screening, but no testing method was preferred. CONCLUSION: The information required for Lynch syndrome screening decisions is routinely collected but seldom used. There is a critical gap between collection of family history and its use to guide Lynch syndrome screening, which may support a case for implementation of universal screening guidelines.