Exploring Stakeholders' Perspectives on Implementing Universal Germline Testing for Colorectal Cancer: Findings From a Clinical Practice Survey.

PURPOSE: New guidelines recommend considering germline genetic testing for all patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). However, there is a lack of data on stakeholders' perspectives on the advantages and barriers of implementing universal germline testing (UGT). This study assessed the perspectives of members of the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer (CGA-IGC) regarding the implementation of UGT for patients with CRC, including readiness, logistics, and barriers. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was sent to 317 active members of CGA-IGC. The survey included sections on demographics, clinical practice specialty, established institutional practices for testing, and questions pertaining to support of and barriers to implementing UGT for patients with CRC. RESULTS: Eighty CGA-IGC members (25%) participated, including 42 genetic counselors (53%) and 14 gastroenterologists (18%). Forty-seven (59%) reported an academic medical center as their primary work setting, and most participants (56%) had more than 10 years of clinical practice. Although most participants (73%) supported UGT, 54% indicated that changes in practice would be required before adopting UGT, and 39% indicated that these changes would be challenging to implement. There was support for both genetics and nongenetics providers to order genetic testing, and a majority (57%) supported a standardized multigene panel rather than a customized gene panel. Key barriers to UGT implementation included limited genetics knowledge among nongenetics providers, time-consuming processes for obtaining consent, ordering tests, disclosing results, and lack of insurance coverage. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates wide support among hereditary GI cancer experts for implementation of UGT for patients with CRC. However, alternative service delivery models using nongenetics providers should be considered to address the logistical barriers to UGT implementation, particularly the growing demand for genetic testing.

Cancer surveillance for transgender and gender diverse patients with Lynch syndrome: a practice resource of the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer.

Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) populations with hereditary cancer syndromes face unique obstacles to identifying and obtaining appropriate cancer surveillance and risk-reducing procedures. There is a lack of care provider knowledge about TGD health management. Lynch syndrome (LS) is one of the most common hereditary cancer syndromes, affecting an estimated 1 in 279 individuals. There are no clinical guidelines specific for TGD individuals with LS, highlighting a need to improve the quality of care for this population. There is an urgent need for cancer surveillance recommendations for TGD patients. This commentary provides recommendations for cancer surveillance, risk-reducing strategies, and genetic counseling considerations for TGD patients with LS.

Current chemoprevention approaches in Lynch syndrome and Familial adenomatous polyposis: a global clinical practice survey.

Background: International chemoprevention preferences and approaches in Lynch syndrome (LS) and APC-associated polyposis, including Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and attenuated FAP (AFAP) have not been previously explored. Aim: To describe current chemoprevention strategies for patients with LS or FAP/AFAP (referred to collectively as FAP) practiced by members of four international hereditary cancer societies through administration of a survey. Results: Ninety-six participants across four hereditary gastrointestinal cancer societies responded to the survey. Most respondents (91%, 87/96) completed information regarding their demographics and practice characteristics relating to hereditary gastrointestinal cancer and chemoprevention clinical practices. Sixty-nine percent (60/87) of respondents offer chemoprevention for FAP and/or LS as a part of their practice. Of the 75% (72/96) of survey respondents who were eligible to answer practice-based clinical vignettes based off of their responses to ten barrier questions regarding chemoprevention, 88% (63/72) of those participants completed at least one case vignette question to further characterize chemoprevention practices in FAP and/or LS. In FAP, 51% (32/63) would offer chemoprevention for rectal polyposis, with sulindac - 300 mg (18%, 10/56) and aspirin (16%, 9/56) being the most frequently selected options. In LS, 93% (55/59) of professionals discuss chemoprevention and 59% (35/59) frequently recommend chemoprevention. Close to half of the respondents (47%, 26/55) would recommend beginning aspirin at time of commencement of the patient's first screening colonoscopy (usually at age 25yrs). Ninety-four percent (47/50) of respondents would consider a patient's diagnosis of LS as an influential factor for aspirin use. There was no consensus on the dose of aspirin (≤100 mg, >100 mg - 325 mg or 600 mg) to offer patients with LS and there was no agreement on how other factors, such as BMI, hypertension, family history of colorectal cancer, and family history of heart disease, would affect the recommendation for aspirin use. Possible harm among older patients (>70 years) was identified as the most common reason to discourage aspirin use. Conclusion: Although chemoprevention is widely discussed and offered to patients with FAP and LS by an international group of hereditary gastrointestinal cancer experts, there is significant heterogeneity in how it is applied in clinical practice.

Patterns of germline and somatic testing after universal tumor screening for Lynch syndrome: A clinical practice survey of active members of the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer.

Clinical guidelines recommend universal tumor screening (UTS) of colorectal and endometrial cancers for Lynch syndrome (LS). There are limited guidelines for how to integrate germline testing and somatic tumor testing after a mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) tumor is identified. We sought to characterize current practice patterns and barriers to preferred practice among clinical providers in high-risk cancer programs. A clinical practice survey was sent to 423 active members of the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer (CGA-IGC) with a follow-up survey sent to 103 clinician responders. The survey outlined clinical vignettes and asked respondents their preferred next test. The survey intended to assess: (1) the role of patient age and family history in risk assessment and (2) barriers to preferred genetic testing. Genetic test options included targeted germline testing based on dMMR expression, germline testing for LS, germline testing with a multigene cancer panel including LS, or paired tumor/germline testing including LS. In October 2020, 117 of 423 (28%) members completed the initial survey including 103 (88%) currently active clinicians. In April 2021, a follow-up survey was sent to active clinicians, with 45 (44%) completing this second survey. After selecting their preferred next germline or paired tumor/germline tumor test based on the clinical vignette, 39% of respondents reported wanting to make a different choice for the initial genetic test without any testing barriers. The proportion of respondents choosing a different initial genetic test was dependent on the proband's age at diagnosis and specified family history. The reported barriers included patient's lack of insurance coverage, patient unable/unwilling to self-pay for proposed testing, and inadequate tumor tissue. Responders reported insurance, financial constraints, and limited tumor tissue as influencing preferred genetic testing in high-risk clinics, thus resulting in possible under-diagnosis of LS and impacting potential surveillance and cascade testing of at-risk relatives.

Clinical features and long-term outcomes of patients with colonic oligopolyposis of unknown etiology.

BACKGROUND: Colonic adenomatous polyposis of unknown etiology (CPUE) is an adenomatous polyposis phenotype that resembles Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (FAP) even though no germline pathogenic variant is identified. AIM: We sought to better characterize the clinical features and outcomes in a cohort of CPUE patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective case series of patients 18 years old or older with aden-omatous oligopolyposis (between 10-100 adenomas) and negative genetic testing, identified through the Hereditary Gastrointestinal Cancer Database at Massachusetts General Hospital, a tertiary academic referral center. A retrospective chart review was performed with a focus on demographics, alcohol and tobacco use, medication use, familial malignancy and polyp burden, genetic testing information, endoscopic surveillance data including the corresponding histopathology, colonic and extracolonic malignancies, mortality events, and their etiology. Spearman correlation and Pearson Chi-square test (or Fisher's exact test) were used for continuous and categorical variables respectively. RESULTS: CPUE patients were primarily male (69%) and presented for genetic counseling at 63.7 years. Only 2 patients (2.9%) reported a first-degree relative with polyposis. During an average surveillance period of 12.3 years, 0.5 colonoscopies per year were performed. Patients developed 2.3 new adenomas per year. 4 (5.7%) were diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) at a mean age of 66 years, and 3 were diagnosed prior to the onset of oligopolyposis. 7 (10%) required colectomy due to advanced dysplasia or polyp burden. With respect to upper gastrointestinal manifestations, 1 patient had a gastric adenoma, but there were no cases of gastric or small bowel polyposis. During surveillance, 10 (14%) patients died at a mean age of 72, and none were due to CRC. CONCLUSION: CPUE is distinct from familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) syndrome and the use of FAP surveillance guidelines may result in unnecessarily frequent upper and lower endoscopies.

Finding a Balance: Reconciling the Needs of the Institution, Patient, and Genetic Counselor for Optimal Resource Utilization.

The current practice of cancer genetic counseling is undergoing widespread change and scrutiny. While there are clinical resources for genetic counselors (GCs) regarding the delivery of cancer genetic services, there is limited literature regarding effective management of a genetic counseling clinical program. We have developed administrative tools to manage a large team of GCs at a single academic medical center over a period of increasing demand for genetics services, with the initial aim of decreasing wait time for urgent genetic counseling visits. Here, we describe the three main elements of the clinical operations: Balancing patient volume between GCs, scheduling tracks for both routine and urgent appointments, and a team of triaging GCs to ensure appropriate patient referrals. For each of these elements, we describe how they have been modified over time and present data to support the utility of these strategies. The preliminary evidence offered here suggests that these tools allow for an equitable distribution of patient volume between team members, as well as the timely and accurate scheduling of urgent patients. As a result of the experiences presented here, other genetic counseling programs grappling with similar issues should be aware that it is possible to shift clinical operations to serve certain patient populations in a more timely fashion while keeping both providers and GC staff satisfied.