Population-based germline breast cancer gene association studies and meta-analysis to inform wider mainstream testing.

BACKGROUND: Germline genetic testing, previously restricted to familial and young-onset breast cancer, is now offered increasingly broadly to 'population-type' breast cancer patients in mainstream oncology clinics, with wide variation in the genes included. METHODS: Weighted meta-analysis was performed for three population-based case-control studies (BRIDGES, CARRIERS and UK Biobank) comprising in total 101,397 women with breast cancer and 312,944 women without breast cancer, to quantify for 37 putative breast cancer susceptibility genes (BCSGs) the frequency of pathogenic variants (PVs) in unselected, 'population-type' breast cancer cases and their association with breast cancer and its subtypes. RESULTS: Meta-analysed odds ratios (ORs) and frequencies of PVs in population-type breast cancer cases were generated for BRCA1 (OR= 8.73 (95% CI 7.47-10.20), 1 in 101), BRCA2 (OR=5.68 (5.13-6.30), 1 in 68) and PALB2 (OR= 4.30 (95% CI 3.68-5.03), 1 in 187). For both CHEK2 (OR=2.40 (95% CI 2.21-2.62), 1 in 73) and ATM (OR=2.16 (95%CI 1.93-2.41), 1 in 132) subgroup analysis showed stronger association with ER-positive disease. Magnitude of association and frequency of PVs were low for RAD51C (OR=1.53 (95%CI 1.15-2.04), 1 in 913), RAD51D (OR=1.76, (95%CI 1.15-2.41, 1 in 1079) and BARD1 (OR=2.34 (1.85-2.97), 1 in 672); frequencies and associations were moderately higher restricting to triple-negative breast cancers The PV-frequency in 'population-type' breast cancer cases was very low for 'syndromic' BCSGs TP53 (1 in 1844), STK11 (1 in 11,525), CDH1 (1 in 2668), PTEN (1 in 3755) and NF1 (1 in 1470), with metrics of association also modest ranging from OR=3.62 (95%CI 1.98-6.61) for TP53 down to OR=1.60 (95%CI 0.48-5.30) for STK11. CONCLUSIONS: These metrics reflecting 'population-type' breast cancer will be informative to defining the appropriate gene set as we continue to expand to germline testing out to more unselected population-type breast cancer cases.

BRCA1 Intragenic Duplication Combined with a Likely Pathogenic TP53 Variant in a Patient with Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Clinical Risk and Management.

For patients with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, the probability of carrying two pathogenic variants (PVs) in dominant cancer-predisposing genes is rare. Using targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS), we investigated a 49-year-old Caucasian woman who developed a highly aggressive breast tumor. Our analyses identified an intragenic germline heterozygous duplication in BRCA1 with an additional likely PV in the TP53 gene. The BRCA1 variant was confirmed by multiplex ligation probe amplification (MLPA), and genomic breakpoints were characterized at the nucleotide level (c.135-2578_442-1104dup). mRNA extracted from lymphocytes was amplified by RT-PCR and then Sanger sequenced, revealing a tandem duplication r.135_441dup; p.(Gln148Ilefs*20). This duplication results in the synthesis of a truncated and, most likely, nonfunctional protein. Following functional studies, the TP53 exon 5 c.472C > T; p.(Arg158Cys) missense variant was classified as likely pathogenic by the Li-Fraumeni Syndrome (LFS) working group. This type of unexpected association will be increasingly identified in the future, with the switch from targeted BRCA sequencing to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) panel sequencing, raising the question of how these patients should be managed. It is therefore important to record and investigate these rare double-heterozygous genotypes.

Prevention, diagnosis and clinical management of hereditary breast cancer beyond BRCA1/2 genes.

The detection of germline pathogenic variants (gPVs) in BRCA1/2 and other breast cancer (BC) genes is rising exponentially thanks to the advent of multi-gene panel testing. This promising technology, coupled with the availability of specific therapies for BC BRCA-related, has increased the number of patients eligible for genetic testing. Implementing multi-gene panel testing for hereditary BC screening holds promise to maximise benefits for patients at hereditary risk of BC. These benefits range from prevention programs to antineoplastic-targeted therapies. However, the clinical management of these patients is complex and requires guidelines based on recent evidence. Furthermore, applying multi-gene panel testing into clinical practice increases the detection of variants of uncertain significance (VUSs). This augments the complexity of patients' clinical management, becoming an unmet need for medical oncologists. This review aims to collect updated evidence on the most common BC-related genes besides BRCA1/2, from their biological role in BC development to their potential impact in tailoring prevention and treatment strategies.

Bayesian meta-analysis of penetrance for cancer risk.

Multi-gene panel testing allows many cancer susceptibility genes to be tested quickly at a lower cost making such testing accessible to a broader population. Thus, more patients carrying pathogenic germline mutations in various cancer-susceptibility genes are being identified. This creates a great opportunity, as well as an urgent need, to counsel these patients about appropriate risk-reducing management strategies. Counseling hinges on accurate estimates of age-specific risks of developing various cancers associated with mutations in a specific gene, ie, penetrance estimation. We propose a meta-analysis approach based on a Bayesian hierarchical random-effects model to obtain penetrance estimates by integrating studies reporting different types of risk measures (eg, penetrance, relative risk, odds ratio) while accounting for the associated uncertainties. After estimating posterior distributions of the parameters via a Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm, we estimate penetrance and credible intervals. We investigate the proposed method and compare with an existing approach via simulations based on studies reporting risks for two moderate-risk breast cancer susceptibility genes, ATM and PALB2. Our proposed method is far superior in terms of coverage probability of credible intervals and mean square error of estimates. Finally, we apply our method to estimate the penetrance of breast cancer among carriers of pathogenic mutations in the ATM gene.

Pleomorphic Rhabdomyosarcoma of the Uterine Corpus in an Adult Who Underwent Multi-gene Panel Testing.

Background/Aim: Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) is the most common malignant soft tissue tumor in children. Adult primary RMS of gynecological origin is a rare condition and uterine RMS is an aggressive malignancy with a poor prognosis. The genetic variants associated with uterine RMS in adults have yet to be fully elucidated, and there is no established therapeutic strategy for rare tumors. Case Report: A 69-year-old Japanese woman was referred to our hospital with abdominal bloating. Imaging examination revealed a tumor with diameter of 85 mm located in the uterus and multiple regional lymph node metastases. Biopsy of the uterine corpus indicated possible uterine carcinosarcoma or RMS. Following debulking surgery, the patient was diagnosed with stage IVB pleomorphic RMS. The patient was treated with two courses of doxorubicin every three weeks and one course of combination chemotherapy with vincristine, actinomycin, and cyclophosphamide. Because of rapid progression of the disease, we decided to perform multi-gene panel testing to determine the most effective therapeutic strategy. However, no therapeutic plan based on genetic information was identified. The patient with chemotherapy-refractory RMS died 11 weeks after surgery. Conclusion: Our patient had advanced uterine RMS with an unresectable tumor that was resistant to chemotherapy, resulting in poor outcomes. Despite conducting multi-gene panel testing, no tailored therapeutic approach based on genetic information was found. This case highlights the challenges in managing uterine RMS in adults and underscores the urgent need for further research to identify effective treatment modalities.

Genomic medicine advances for brain tumors.

Cancer genome profiling has revealed important genetic alterations that serve as prognostic indicators and guides for treatment decisions, enabling precision medicine. The shift to molecular diagnosis of brain tumors, as reflected in the 2021 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System, is a crucial role for treatment decision-making. This review discusses the significance and role of cancer genome profiling in precision medicine for malignant brain tumors, particularly gliomas. Furthermore, we explore the progress in cancer genome analysis, focusing on cancer gene panel testing, integration of genomic information in brain tumor classification, and hereditary tumors. Additionally, we discuss the transformative effect of genomic medicine on early detection, risk assessment, and precision medicine strategies. The tumor mutational burden in brain tumors is considered low, but the application of molecular targeted drugs, such as isocitrate dehydrogenase inhibitors, v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1 inhibitors, fibroblast growth factor receptor inhibitors, neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase, mechanistic target of rapamycin inhibitors, and anti-programmed death receptor-1 antibody drugs are promising for glioma treatment. We also discuss the future prospects of molecular targeted drugs.

A complex rearrangement between APC and TP63 associated with familial adenomatous polyposis identified by multimodal genomic analysis: a case report.

Genetic testing of the APC gene by sequencing analysis and MLPA is available across commercial laboratories for the definitive genetic diagnosis of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). However, some genetic alterations are difficult to detect using conventional analyses. Here, we report a case of a complex genomic APC-TP63 rearrangement, which was identified in a patient with FAP by a series of genomic analyses, including multigene panel testing, chromosomal analyses, and long-read sequencing. A woman in her thirties was diagnosed with FAP due to multiple polyps in her colon and underwent total colectomy. Subsequent examination revealed fundic gland polyposis. No family history suggesting FAP was noted except for a first-degree relative with desmoid fibromatosis. The conventional APC gene testing was performed by her former doctor, but no pathogenic variant was detected, except for 2 variants of unknown significance. The patient was referred to our hospital for further genetic analysis. After obtaining informed consent in genetic counseling, we conducted a multigene panel analysis. As insertion of a part of the TP63 sequence was detected within exon16 of APC, further analyses, including chromosomal analysis and long-read sequencing, were performed and a complex translocation between chromosomes 3 and 5 containing several breakpoints in TP63 and APC was identified. No phenotype associated with TP63 pathogenic variants, such as split-hand/foot malformation (SHFM) or ectrodactyly, ectodermal dysplasia, or cleft lip/palate syndrome (EEC) was identified in the patient or her relatives. Multimodal genomic analyses should be considered in cases where no pathogenic germline variants are detected by conventional genetic testing despite an evident medical or family history of hereditary cancer syndromes.

Clinical usefulness of NGS multi-gene panel testing in hereditary cancer analysis.

Introduction: A considerable number of families with pedigrees suggestive of a Mendelian form of Breast Cancer (BC), Ovarian Cancer (OC), or Pancreatic Cancer (PC) do not show detectable BRCA1/2 mutations after genetic testing. The use of multi-gene hereditary cancer panels increases the possibility to identify individuals with cancer predisposing gene variants. Our study was aimed to evaluate the increase in the detection rate of pathogenic mutations in BC, OC, and PC patients when using a multi-gene panel. Methods: 546 patients affected by BC (423), PC (64), or OC (59) entered the study from January 2020 to December 2021. For BC patients, inclusion criteria were i) positive cancer family background, ii) early onset, and iii) triple negative BC. PC patients were enrolled when affected by metastatic cancer, while OC patients were all submitted to genetic testing without selection. The patients were tested using a Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) panel containing 25 genes in addition to BRCA1/2. Results: Forty-four out of 546 patients (8%) carried germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PV/LPV) on BRCA1/2 genes, and 46 (8%) presented PV or LPV in other susceptibility genes. Discussion: Our findings demonstrate the utility of expanded panel testing in patients with suspected hereditary cancer syndromes, since this approach increased the mutation detection rate of 15% in PC, 8% in BC and 5% in OC cases. In absence of multi-gene panel analysis, a considerable percentage of mutations would have been lost.

Increased Co-Occurrence of Pathogenic Variants in Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer and Lynch Syndromes: A Consequence of Multigene Panel Genetic Testing?

The probability of carrying two pathogenic variants (PVs) in dominant cancer-predisposing genes for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and lynch syndromes in the same patient is uncommon, except in populations where founder effects exist. Two breast cancer women that are double heterozygotes (DH) for both BRCA1/BRCA2, one ovarian cancer case DH for BRCA1/RAD51C, and another breast and colorectal cancer who is DH for BRCA2/PMS2 were identified in our cohort. Ages at diagnosis and severity of disease in BRCA1/BRCA2 DH resembled BRCA1 single-carrier features. Similarly, the co-existence of the BRCA2 and PMS2 mutations prompted the development of breast and colorectal cancer in the same patient. The first BRCA1/BRCA2 DH was identified by HA-based and Sanger sequencing (1 of 623 families with BRCA PVs). However, this ratio has increased up to 2.9% (1 DH carrier vs. 103 single PV carriers) since using a custom 35-cancer gene on-demand panel. The type of cancer developed in each DH patient was consistent with the independently inherited condition, and the clinical outcome was no worse than in patients with single BRCA1 mutations. Therefore, the clinical impact, especially in patients with two hereditary syndromes, lies in genetic counseling tailor-made for each family based on the clinical guidelines for each syndrome. The number of DH is expected to be increased in the future as a result of next generation sequencing routines.

Utility of germline multi-gene panel testing in patients with endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with germline mutations in mismatch repair genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2) associated with Lynch syndrome (LS) have an increased lifetime risk of endometrial cancer (EC). Multi-gene panel testing (MGPT) is a recent hereditary cancer risk tool enabling next-generation sequencing of numerous genes in parallel. We determined the prevalence of actionable cancer predisposition gene mutations identified through MGPT in an EC patient cohort. METHODS: A single center retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients with EC who had a clinical indication for genetic testing and who underwent MGPT as part of standard of care treatment between 2012 and 2021. Pathogenic mutations were identified and actionable mutations were defined as those with clinical management implications. Additionally, the number of individuals identified with LS was compared between MGPT and tumor-based screening. RESULTS: The study included a total of 224 patients. Thirty-three patients [14.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 10.4-20.1] had actionable mutations. Twenty-one patients (9.4%, 95% CI = 5.9-14.0) had mutations in LS genes (4 MLH1, 5 MSH2, 7 MSH6, 4 PMS2, 1 Epcam-MSH2). MGPT revealed two patients with LS (9.5% of LS cases) not identified through routine tumor-based screening. Thirteen patients (5.8%, 95% CI = 3.1-9.7) had at least one actionable mutation in a non-Lynch syndrome gene (6 CHEK2, 2 BRCA2, 2 ATM, 2 APC, 1 RAD51C, 1 BRCA1). CONCLUSIONS: Germline MGPT is both feasible and informative as it identifies LS cases not found on tumor testing as well as additional actionable mutations in patients with EC.

Multi-Gene Panel Testing in Gastroenterology: Are We Ready for the Results?

Genetic testing aims to identify patients at risk for inherited cancer susceptibility. In the last decade, there was a significant increase in the request of broader panels of genes as multi-gene panel testing became widely available. However, physicians may be faced with genetic findings for which there is lack of management evidence, despite some progress in understanding their clinical relevance. In this short review, we discuss the advantages and the drawbacks related to multi-gene panel testing in the setting of a Gastrointestinal Familial Cancer Risk clinic. We also summarize the available recommendations on management of pathogenic variant carriers.

O estudo genético tem como objetivo identificar indivíduos em risco de cancro hereditário. Na última década, verificou-se um aumento significativo do número de genes analisados devido ao surgimento de painéis de sequenciação multi-gene. Neste sentido, os médicos podem ser confrontados com resultados genéticos para os quais não há orientações de manejo ou seguimento, apesar de progressos na compreensão da relevância clínica dessas variantes genéticas. Nesta revisão de literatura, discutimos as vantagens e desvantagens dos testes de sequenciação multi-gene e apresentamos um resumo das recomendações disponíveis relativas à orientação dos portadores de variantes genéticas patogénicas.

Impact of deleterious variants in other genes beyond BRCA1/2 detected in breast/ovarian and pancreatic cancer patients by NGS-based multi-gene panel testing: looking over the hedge.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary breast cancer (BC), ovarian cancer (OC), and pancreatic cancer (PC) are the major BRCA-associated tumours. However, some BRCA1/2-wild-type (wt) patients with a strong personal and/or family history of cancer need a further genetic testing through a multi-gene panel containing other high- and moderate-risk susceptibility genes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Our study was aimed to assess if some BC, OC, or PC patients should be offered multi-gene panel testing, based on well-defined criteria concerning their personal and/or family history of cancer, such as earliness of cancer onset, occurrence of multiple tumours, or presence of at least two or more affected first-degree relatives. For this purpose, 205 out of 915 BC, OC, or PC patients, resulted negative for BRCA1/2 and with significant personal and/or family history of cancer, were genetically tested for germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PVs/LPVs) in genes different from BRCA1/2. RESULTS: Our investigation revealed that 31 (15.1%) out of 205 patients harboured germline PVs/LPVs in no-BRCA genes, including PALB2, CHEK2, ATM, MUTYH, MSH2, and RAD51C. Interestingly, in the absence of an analysis conducted through multi-gene panel, a considerable percentage (15.1%) of PVs/LPVs would have been lost. CONCLUSIONS: Providing a multi-gene panel testing to BRCA1/2-wt BC/OC/PC patients with a strong personal and/or family history of cancer could significantly increase the detection rates of germline PVs/LPVs in other cancer predisposition genes beyond BRCA1/2. The use of a multi-gene panel testing could improve the inherited cancer risk estimation and clinical management of patients and unaffected family members.

Molecular Diagnosis of Neurofibromatosis by Multigene Panel Testing.

Neurofibromatosis (NF) is an autosomal genetic disorder for which early and definite clinical diagnoses are difficult. To identify the diagnosis, five affected probands with suspected NF from unrelated families were included in this study. Molecular analysis was performed using multigene panel testing and Sanger sequencing. Ultradeep sequencing was used to analyze the mutation rate in the tissues from the proband with mosaic mutations. Three different pathogenic variants of the NF1 gene were found in three probands who mainly complained of café-au-lait macules (CALMs), including one frameshift variant c.5072_5073insTATAACTGTAACTCCTGGGTCAGGGAGTACACCAA:p.Tyr1692Ilefs in exon 37, one missense variant c.3826C > T:p.Arg1276Ter in exon 28, and one splicing variant c.4110 + 1G > T at the first base downstream of the 3'-end of exon 30. One NF1 gene mosaic variant was found in a proband who complained of cutaneous neurofibroma with the frameshift variant c.495_498del:p.Thr165fs in exon 5, and ultradeep sequencing showed the highest mutation rate of 10.81% in cutaneous neurofibromas. A frameshift variant, c.36_39del:p.Ser12fs in exon 1 of the NF2 gene, was found in a proband who presented with skin plaques and intracranial neurogenic tumors. All of these pathogenic variants were heterozygous, one was not reported, and one not in Chinese before. This study expands the pathogenic variant spectrum of NF and demonstrates the clinical diagnosis.

Homologous Recombination Deficiencies and Hereditary Tumors.

Homologous recombination (HR) is a vital process for repairing DNA double-strand breaks. Germline variants in the HR pathway, comprising at least 10 genes, such as BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, BARD1, BRIP1, CHEK2, NBS1(NBN), PALB2, RAD51C, and RAD51D, lead to inherited susceptibility to specific types of cancers, including those of the breast, ovaries, prostate, and pancreas. The penetrance of germline pathogenic variants of each gene varies, whereas all their associated protein products are indispensable for maintaining a high-fidelity DNA repair system by HR. The present review summarizes the basic molecular mechanisms and components that collectively play a role in maintaining genomic integrity against DNA double-strand damage and their clinical implications on each type of hereditary tumor.

The impact of the number of tests presented and a provider recommendation on decisions about genetic testing for cancer risk.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how the method of presenting testing options and a provider recommendation can influence a decision about genetic testing for inherited cancer predispositions. METHODS: An online hypothetical vignette study was completed by 454 healthy volunteers. Participants were randomized to receive one of two survey versions which differed by genetic testing choice presentation. One group was shown three options simultaneously (no test, 5-gene or 15-gene), and a second group received the 15-gene option after choosing between the no test and 5-gene options. A preference-based provider recommendation was also incorporated. We examined the effect of these interventions on test selection. RESULTS: Participants in the simultaneous group were more likely to choose a genetic test than those in the sequential group (OR: 2.35, p=0.003). This effect was no longer observed when individuals who had selected no-test in the sequential group were told about the 15-gene test (OR: 1.03 p=0.932). Incorporating a provider recommendation into the hypothetical scenario led to more preference-consistent choices (χ2 = 8.53, p < 0.0035,). CONCLUSIONS: A larger menu of testing choices led to higher testing uptake. A preference-based clinician recommendation resulted in more preference-consistent choices. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The structuring of testing options and preference-sensitive recommendations appear to facilitate informed testing decisions.

Detection of Germline Mutations in a Cohort of 139 Patients with Bilateral Breast Cancer by Multi-Gene Panel Testing: Impact of Pathogenic Variants in Other Genes beyond BRCA1/2.

Patients with unilateral breast cancer (UBC) have an increased risk of developing bilateral breast cancer (BBC). The annual risk of contralateral BC is about 0.5%, but increases by up to 3% in BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variant (PV) carriers. Our study was aimed to evaluate whether all BBC patients should be offered multi-gene panel testing, regardless their cancer family history and age at diagnosis. We retrospectively collected all clinical information of 139 BBC patients genetically tested for germline PVs in different cancer susceptibility genes by NGS-based multi-gene panel testing. Our investigation revealed that 52 (37.4%) out of 139 BBC patients harbored germline PVs in high- and intermediate-penetrance breast cancer (BC) susceptibility genes including BRCA1, BRCA2, PTEN, PALB2, CHEK2, ATM, RAD51C. Nineteen out of 53 positively tested patients harbored a PV in a known BC susceptibility gene (no-BRCA). Interestingly, in the absence of an analysis performed via multi-gene panel, a significant proportion (14.4%) of PVs would have been lost. Therefore, offering a NGS-based multi-gene panel testing to all BBC patients may significantly increase the detection rates of germline PVs in other cancer susceptibility genes beyond BRCA1/2, avoiding underestimation of the number of individuals affected by a hereditary tumor syndrome.

Literature Review of BARD1 as a Cancer Predisposing Gene with a Focus on Breast and Ovarian Cancers.

Soon after the discovery of BRCA1 and BRCA2 over 20 years ago, it became apparent that not all hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer syndrome families were explained by germline variants in these cancer predisposing genes, suggesting that other such genes have yet to be discovered. BRCA1-associated ring domain (BARD1), a direct interacting partner of BRCA1, was one of the earliest candidates investigated. Sequencing analyses revealed that potentially pathogenic BARD1 variants likely conferred a low-moderate risk to hereditary breast cancer, but this association is inconsistent. Here, we review studies of BARD1 as a cancer predisposing gene and illustrate the challenge of discovering additional cancer risk genes for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer. We selected peer reviewed research articles that focused on three themes: (i) sequence analyses of BARD1 to identify potentially pathogenic germline variants in adult hereditary cancer syndromes; (ii) biological assays of BARD1 variants to assess their effect on protein function; and (iii) association studies of BARD1 variants in family-based and case-control study groups to assess cancer risk. In conclusion, BARD1 is likely to be a low-moderate penetrance breast cancer risk gene.

Updates in hereditary breast cancer genetic testing and practical high risk breast management in gene carriers.

Testing for hereditary predisposition to breast cancer is rapidly expanding in parallel with the emerging field of molecular genetics given the associated implications for screening, risk reduction and cancer therapeutics for identified gene mutation carriers. With the advent of next generation multigene panel testing for hereditary predisposition and decreasing cost for that testing, more breast cancer patients (and unaffected family members) are undergoing cancer genetic testing. With multiple genes being tested and the myriad of possible results and implications for patients and their families, the process of genetic counseling is of paramount importance in promoting understanding by both patients and providers of risks and options for risk management. Guidelines exist to facilitate a multidisciplinary approach to management of individuals identified as being at increased risk, and there must be an appreciation for flexibility as guidelines are applied to individual families. This update summarizes recommendations regarding who may benefit from breast cancer risk assessment and genetic counseling, controversies regarding inclusion for testing and provides a framework for the practical management of high risk gene carriers.

Diagnostic yield of multigene panel testing in an Israeli cohort: enrichment of low-penetrance variants.

BACKGROUND: Carriers of pathogenic variants (PVs) in moderate-high-penetrance cancer susceptibility genes are offered tailored surveillance schemes for early cancer diagnosis. The clinical implications of low-penetrance variant carriers are less clear. METHODS: Clinical and demographic data were retrieved for a cohort of Israeli individuals who underwent oncogenetic testing by the 30-gene cancer panel at Color Genomics laboratory, between 04/2013 and 12/2018. RESULTS: Of 758 genotyped individuals, 504 had been diagnosed with cancer prior to testing: 283 (56%) had breast cancer and 106 (21%) colorectal cancer. Pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants were detected in 123 (16%) individuals. Overall, 44 different P/LP variants were detected in 18/30 cancer susceptibility genes; 20 of them were founder/recurrent mutations. Of the carriers, 39 (32%), 10 (8%), and 74 (60%) carried high-, moderate-, or low-penetrance variants, respectively. After excluding low-penetrance variants, 7% (33/504) of all cancer patients, 6% of breast or ovarian cancer patients were found to be carriers, as well as 7% (14/203) of individuals with colonic polyps, and 4% (11/254) of cancer-free individuals. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic yield of moderate- and high-penetrance PVs using multigene panel testing was 6%, with 3.7% carriers of non-recurrent PVs. This yield should be discussed during pre-test counseling, and emphasizes the need for harmonized recommendations regarding clinical implications of low-penetrance variants.

Ancestry-specific hereditary cancer panel yields: Moving toward more personalized risk assessment.

Healthcare disparities in genomic medicine are well described. Despite some improvements, we continue to see fewer individuals of African American, Asian, and Hispanic ancestry undergo genetic counseling and testing compared to those of European ancestry. It is well established that variant of uncertain significance (VUS) rates are higher among non-European ancestral groups undergoing multi-gene hereditary cancer panel testing. However, pathogenic variant (PV) yields, and genomic data in general, are often reported in aggregate and derived from cohorts largely comprised of individuals of European ancestry. We performed a retrospective review of clinical and ancestral data for individuals undergoing multi-gene hereditary cancer panel testing to determine ancestry-specific PV and VUS rates. An ancestry other than European was reported in 29,042/104,851 (27.7%) of individuals. Compared to Europeans (9.4%), individuals of Middle Eastern ancestry were more likely to test positive for one or more pathogenic variants (12.1%, p = .0025), while African Americans were less likely (7.9%, p < .0001). Asian and Middle Eastern individuals were most likely (34.8% and 33.2%, respectively) to receive a report with an overall classification of VUS, while individuals of Ashkenazi Jewish and European ancestry were least likely (17.1% and 20.4%, respectively). These data suggest that in addition to higher VUS rates, there may be ancestry-specific PV yields. Providing aggregate data derived from cohorts saturated with European individuals does not adequately reflect genetic testing outcomes in minority groups, and interrogation of ancestry-specific data is a step toward a more personalized risk assessment.