Population screening shows risk of inherited cancer and familial hypercholesterolemia in Oregon.

The Healthy Oregon Project (HOP) is a statewide effort that aims to build a large research repository and influence the health of Oregonians through providing no-cost genetic screening to participants for a next-generation sequencing 32-gene panel comprising genes related to inherited cancers and familial hypercholesterolemia. This type of unbiased population screening can detect at-risk individuals who may otherwise be missed by conventional medical approaches. However, challenges exist for this type of high-throughput testing in an academic setting, including developing a low-cost high-efficiency test and scaling up the clinical laboratory for processing large numbers of samples. Modifications to our academic clinical laboratory including efficient test design, robotics, and a streamlined analysis approach increased our ability to test more than 1,000 samples per month for HOP using only one dedicated HOP laboratory technologist. Additionally, enrollment using a HIPAA-compliant smartphone app and sample collection using mouthwash increased efficiency and reduced cost. Here, we present our experience three years into HOP and discuss the lessons learned, including our successes, challenges, opportunities, and future directions, as well as the genetic screening results for the first 13,670 participants tested. Overall, we have identified 730 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in 710 participants in 24 of the 32 genes on the panel. The carrier rate for pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in the inherited cancer genes on the panel for an unselected population was 5.0% and for familial hypercholesterolemia was 0.3%. Our laboratory experience described here may provide a useful model for population screening projects in other states.

Identification, genetic testing, and management of hereditary melanoma.

Several distinct melanoma syndromes have been defined, and genetic tests are available for the associated causative genes. Guidelines for melanoma genetic testing have been published as an informal "rule of twos and threes," but these guidelines apply to CDKN2A testing and are not intended for the more recently described non-CDKN2A melanoma syndromes. In order to develop an approach for the full spectrum of hereditary melanoma patients, we have separated melanoma syndromes into two types: "melanoma dominant" and "melanoma subordinate." Syndromes in which melanoma is a predominant cancer type are considered melanoma dominant, although other cancers, such as mesothelioma or pancreatic cancers, may also be observed. These syndromes are associated with defects in CDKN2A, CDK4, BAP1, MITF, and POT1. Melanoma-subordinate syndromes have an increased but lower risk of melanoma than that of other cancer(s) seen in the syndrome, such as breast and ovarian cancer or Cowden syndrome. Many of these melanoma-subordinate syndromes are associated with well-established predisposition genes (e.g., BRCA1/2, PTEN). It is likely that these predisposition genes are responsible for the increased susceptibility to melanoma as well but with lower penetrance than that observed for the dominant cancer(s) in those syndromes. In this review, we describe our extension of the "rule of twos and threes" for melanoma genetic testing. This algorithm incorporates an understanding of the spectrum of cancers and genes seen in association with melanoma to create a more comprehensive and tailored approach to genetic testing.

The role for preimplantation genetic diagnosis in balanced translocation carriers.

OBJECTIVE: Preimplantation genetic diagnosis is an established technique that provides an alternative to prenatal diagnosis for patients who are at risk of transmitting a serious genetic disorder to their offspring. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis has been used for couples who have been at risk for having offspring with single gene or X-linked disorders and for screening for common age-related aneuploidy and in couples who themselves carry balanced chromosomal rearrangements. The aim of this study was to summarize our experience using preimplantation genetic diagnosis after the identification of a parental balanced translocation, specifically as it relates to the number of embryos that are suitable for transfer after preimplantation genetic diagnosis for a known translocation and aneuploidy screening. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective review of data from a single center that involved 6 couples that initiated the process of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for translocation and aneuploidy screening by fluorescent in situ hybridization. RESULTS: A total of 65 embryos were obtained, of which 56 embryos (86%) were suitable for fluorescent in situ hybridization analysis. After fluorescent in situ hybridization, 1 embryo was diagnosed as normal or balanced (1.7%). Forty-three embryos (76.8%) were unbalanced for the translocation; 8 embryos (14.3%) were aneuploid, and 4 embryos (7.1%) were uninformative. There were no clinical pregnancies. CONCLUSION: In our experience, there are very few embryos that are available for transfer from these patients after translocation and aneuploidy screening because of multiple unbalanced segregation products and a high rate of aneuploidy. Factors that contributed to this may be related to which parent carries the translocation, methods that were used for in vitro fertilization, and advanced maternal age. Although preimplantation genetic diagnosis for translocation carriers theoretically can enhance the pregnancy rate for a couple, there are limitations. This information should be shared with couples who are contemplating preimplantation genetic diagnosis for translocation, and the options of sperm or egg donor should be considered.