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).

Germline DNA damage response gene mutations as predictive biomarkers of immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy.

Background: Impaired DNA damage response (DDR) can affect immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) efficacy and lead to heightened immune activation. We assessed the impact of pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) germline DDR mutations on ICI response and toxicity. Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis of 131 cancer patients with germline DNA testing and ICI treatment was performed. Results: Ninety-two patients were DDR-negative (DDR-), and 39 had ≥1 DDR mutation (DDR+). DDR+ patients showed higher objective response rates (ORRs) compared to DDR- in univariate and multivariable analyses, adjusting for age and metastatic disease (62% vs. 23%, unadjusted OR = 5.41; 95% CI, 2.41-12.14; adjusted OR 5.94; 95% CI, 2.35-15.06). Similar results were seen in mismatch repair (MMR), DDR pathways with intact MMR (DDR+MMRi), and homologous recombination (HR) subgroups versus DDR- (adjusted OR MMR = 24.52; 95% CI 2.72-221.38, DDR+MMRi = 4.26; 95% CI, 1.57-11.59, HR = 4.74; 95% CI, 1.49-15.11). DDR+ patients also had higher ORRs with concurrent chemotherapy (82% vs. 39% DDR-, p=0.03) or concurrent tyrosine kinase inhibitors (50% vs. 5% DDR-, p=0.03). No significant differences in immune-related adverse events were observed between DDR+ and DDR- cohorts. Conclusion: P/LP germline DDR mutations may enhance ICI response without significant additional toxicity.

Early Ascertainment of Breast Cancer Diagnoses Comparing Self-Reported Questionnaires and Electronic Health Record Data Warehouse: The WISDOM Study.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to use real-world data sources that may be faster and more complete than self-reported data alone, and timelier than cancer registries, to ascertain breast cancer cases in the ongoing screening trial, the WISDOM Study. METHODS: We developed a data warehouse procedural process (DWPP) to identify breast cancer cases from a subgroup of WISDOM participants (n = 11,314) who received breast-related care from a University of California Health Center in the period 2012-2021 by searching electronic health records (EHRs) in the University of California Data Warehouse (UCDW). Incident breast cancer diagnoses identified by the DWPP were compared with those identified by self-report via annual follow-up online questionnaires. RESULTS: Our study identified 172 participants with confirmed breast cancer diagnoses in the period 2016-2021 by the following sources: 129 (75%) by both self-report and DWPP, 23 (13%) by DWPP alone, and 20 (12%) by self-report only. Among those with International Classification of Diseases 10th revision cancer diagnostic codes, no diagnosis was confirmed in 18% of participants. CONCLUSION: For diagnoses that occurred ≥20 months before the January 1, 2022, UCDW data pull, WISDOM self-reported data via annual questionnaire achieved high accuracy (96%), as confirmed by the cancer registry. More rapid cancer ascertainment can be achieved by combining self-reported data with EHR data from a health system data warehouse registry, particularly to address self-reported questionnaire issues such as timing delays (ie, time lag between participant diagnoses and the submission of their self-reported questionnaire typically ranges from a month to a year) and lack of response. Although cancer registry reporting often is not as timely, it does not require verification as does the DWPP or self-report from annual questionnaires.

Communication About Negative and Uncertain Results: Interactional Dilemmas During a Genetic Telehealth Consult.

This case study focuses on a video telehealth consult to discuss genetic testing results. Participants include a Genetic Counselor (GC) and a Patient (P) previously diagnosed with ovarian cancer who is currently undergoing chemotherapy treatments. Utilizing conversation analysis (CA), attention is first given to a series of interactional dilemmas as GC delivers and P responds to negative, uncertain, and complex test results. Specific findings address practices employed by GC to structure the encounter and establish authority, impacts on P's participation and understandings, recurring and at times problematic orientations to "negative" findings, and inherent ambiguities faced by GC and P when attempting to discern good and bad news. Close examination of these moments provides a unique opportunity to identify, describe, and explain genetic counseling as a co-produced, interactional achievement. These findings are then integrated with patient's post-counseling survey (susceptibility, anxiety, uncertainty, fear, and hope), including reported experiences which broaden understandings of the interactional environment. Specific recommendations are raised for improving counseling skills, enhancing patients' understandings, and building therapeutic alliances addressing both patients' emotional circumstances and the complexities of genetic test results.

Co-Localization of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) and Peritoneal Mesothelioma: A Case Series.

PURPOSE: Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) is associated with increased risk of additional cancers. In this study, synchronous GIST, and peritoneal mesothelioma (PM) were characterized to evaluate the relationship between these two cancers. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted for patients diagnosed with both GIST and PM between July 2010 and June 2021. Patient demographics, past tumor history, intraoperative reports, cross-sectional imaging, peritoneal cancer index (PCI) scoring, somatic next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis, and histology were reviewed. RESULTS: Of 137 patients who underwent primary GIST resection from July 2010 to June 2021, 8 (5.8%) were found to have synchronous PM, and 4 patients (50%) had additional cancers and/or benign tumors. Five (62.5%) were male, and the median age at GIST diagnosis was 57 years (range: 45-76). Seventy-five percent of GISTs originated from the stomach. Of the eight patients, one patient had synchronous malignant mesothelioma (MM), and the remaining had well-differentiated papillary mesothelioma (WDPM), which were primarily located in the region of the primary GIST (89%). The median PCI score was 2 in the WDPM patients. NGS of GIST revealed oncogenic KIT exon 11 (62.5%), PDGFRA D842V (25%), or SDH (12.5%) mutations, while NGS of the MM revealed BAP1 and PBRM1 alterations. CONCLUSIONS: One in 17 GIST patients undergoing resection in this series have PM, which is significantly higher than expected if these two diseases were considered as independent events. Our results indicate that synchronous co-occurrence of GIST and PM is an underrecognized finding, suggesting a possible relationship that deserves further investigation.

Germline alterations among Hispanic men with prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the true rate of pathogenic (P)/likely pathogenic (LP) germline alterations in Hispanic men with prostate cancer as most studies analyzing the prevalence of P/LP germline alterations were performed in a largely non-Hispanic white population (NHW). METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of two separate cohorts of men with prostate cancer: (1) a multicenter cohort of 17,256 men who underwent germline testing in a CLIA-certified laboratory and (2) a single-center cohort of all men eligible for germline testing between 2018 and 2020. The proportions of P/LP alterations and variants of uncertain significance (VUS) were computed. Fisher's exact test was used to compare germline alteration rates for significance. A multivariate logistic regression was performed adjusting for demographic and clinical factors to examine factors associated with germline testing. RESULTS: In the multicenter cohort, the rate of P/LP germline alterations among self-reported Hispanic men was 7.1%, which was lower than self-reported NHW men (9.7% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.058), but was not statistically significant. The VUS rate was significantly higher among the Hispanic cohort (21.5% vs. 16.6%, p = 0.005). In the single-center cohort, 136 Hispanic patients were eligible for testing of which 34 underwent germline testing (26.1%, N = 34/136). Of all prostate cancer patients in the single-center cohort undergoing germline testing (n = 173), the rate of P/LP alterations in Hispanic patients was not significantly different compared to NHW patients (14.7% vs. 12.2%, p = 0.77). The rate of VUS in Hispanic patients was significantly higher than that of NHW patients (20.6% vs. 7.2%, p = 0.047). CONCLUSION: The P/LP germline alteration rate in our cohorts was similar between Hispanic and NHW men. The rate of VUS was significantly higher in Hispanic men, a consequence of undertesting in minority populations. These data support that Hispanic men with prostate cancer should be screened for germline testing similar to NHW men.

Disparities in germline testing among racial minorities with prostate cancer.

Germline testing is becoming increasingly relevant in prostate cancer (PCa) screening, prognosis, and management. A subset of patients with PCa harbor pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (P/LPVs) in genes mediating DNA-repair processes, and these P/LPVs have implications for cancer screening, treatment, and cascade testing. As a result, it is recommended that all men with high-risk localized and metastatic PCa undergo routine germline testing. As more PCa patients undergo germline testing, it is important that clinicians and genetics experts recognize current disparities in germline testing rates among racial/ethnic minorities in the United States. The reasons for these disparities are multiple and require similarly manifold consideration to close the germline testing gap and reduce inequities in PCa screening, management, and treatment.

Novel Models of Genetic Education and Testing for Pancreatic Cancer Interception: Preliminary Results from the GENERATE Study.

Up to 10% of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) carry underlying germline pathogenic variants in cancer susceptibility genes. The GENetic Education Risk Assessment and TEsting (GENERATE) study aimed to evaluate novel methods of genetic education and testing in relatives of patients with PDAC. Eligible individuals had a family history of PDAC and a relative with a germline pathogenic variant in APC, ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDKN2A, EPCAM, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PALB2, PMS2, STK11, or TP53 genes. Participants were recruited at six academic cancer centers and through social media campaigns and patient advocacy efforts. Enrollment occurred via the study website (https://GENERATEstudy.org) and all participation, including collecting a saliva sample for genetic testing, could be done from home. Participants were randomized to one of two remote methods that delivered genetic education about the risks of inherited PDAC and strategies for surveillance. The primary outcome of the study was uptake of genetic testing. From 5/8/2019 to 5/6/2020, 49 participants were randomized to each of the intervention arms. Overall, 90 of 98 (92%) of randomized participants completed genetic testing. The most frequently detected pathogenic variants included those in BRCA2 (N = 15, 17%), ATM (N = 11, 12%), and CDKN2A (N = 4, 4%). Participation in the study remained steady throughout the onset of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Preliminary data from the GENERATE study indicate success of remote alternatives to traditional cascade testing, with genetic testing rates over 90% and a high rate of identification of germline pathogenic variant carriers who would be ideal candidates for PDAC interception approaches. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: Preliminary data from the GENERATE study indicate success of remote alternatives for pancreatic cancer genetic testing and education, with genetic testing uptake rates over 90% and a high rate of identification of germline pathogenic variant carriers who would be ideal candidates for pancreatic cancer interception.

Elevated risk thresholds predict endocrine risk-reducing medication use in the Athena screening registry.

Risk-reducing endocrine therapy use, though the benefit is validated, is extremely low. The FDA has approved tamoxifen and raloxifene for a 5-year Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT) risk ≥ 1.67%. We examined the threshold at which high-risk women are likely to be using endocrine risk-reducing therapies among Athena Breast Health Network participants from 2011-2018. We identified high-risk women by a 5-year BCRAT risk ≥ 1.67% and those in the top 10% and 2.5% risk thresholds by age. We estimated the odds ratio (OR) of current medication use based on these thresholds using logistic regression. One thousand two hundred and one (1.2%) of 104,223 total participants used medication. Of the 33,082 participants with 5-year BCRAT risk ≥ 1.67%, 772 (2.3%) used medication. Of 2445 in the top 2.5% threshold, 209 (8.6%) used medication. Participants whose 5-year risk exceeded 1.67% were more likely to use medication than those whose risk was below this threshold, OR 3.94 (95% CI = 3.50-4.43). The top 2.5% was most strongly associated with medication usage, OR 9.50 (8.13-11.09) compared to the bottom 97.5%. Women exceeding a 5-year BCRAT ≥ 1.67% had modest medication use. We demonstrate that women in the top 2.5% have higher odds of medication use than those in the bottom 97.5% and compared to a risk of 1.67%. The top 2.5% threshold would more effectively target medication use and is being tested prospectively in a randomized control clinical trial.

Prevalence of cancer susceptibility variants in patients with multiple Lynch syndrome related cancers.

Along with early-onset cancers, multiple primary cancers (MPCs) are likely resulting from increased genetic susceptibility; however, the associated predisposition genes or prevalence of the pathogenic variants genes in MPC patients are often unknown. We screened 71 patients with MPC of the stomach, colorectal, and endometrium, sequencing 65 cancer predisposition genes. A subset of 19 patients with early-onset MPC of stomach and colorectum were further evaluated for variants in cancer related genes using both normal and tumor whole exome sequencing. Among 71 patients with MPCs, variants classified to be pathogenic were observed in 15 (21.1%) patients and affected Lynch Syndrome (LS) genes: MLH1 (n = 10), MSH6 (n = 2), PMS2 (n = 2), and MSH2 (n = 1). All carriers had tumors with high microsatellite instability and 13 of them (86.7%) were early-onset, consistent with LS. In 19 patients with early-onset MPCs, loss of function (LoF) variants in RECQL5 were more prevalent in non-LS MPC than in matched sporadic cancer patients (OR = 31.6, 2.73-1700.6, p = 0.001). Additionally, there were high-confidence LoF variants at FANCG and CASP8 in two patients accompanied by somatic loss of heterozygosity in tumor, respectively. The results suggest that genetic screening should be considered for synchronous cancers and metachronous MPCs of the LS tumor spectrum, particularly in early-onset. Susceptibility variants in non-LS genes for MPC patients may exist, but evidence for their role is more elusive than for LS patients.

Risk estimation, anxiety, and breast cancer worry in women at risk for breast cancer: A single-arm trial of personalized risk communication.

OBJECTIVE: Elevated anxiety and breast cancer worry can impede mammographic screening and early breast cancer detection. Genetic advances and risk models make personalized breast cancer risk assessment and communication feasible, but it is unknown whether such communication of risk affects anxiety and disease-specific worry. We studied the effect of a personalized breast cancer screening intervention on risk perception, anxiety, and breast cancer worry. METHODS: Women with a normal mammogram but elevated risk for breast cancer (N = 122) enrolled in the Athena Breast Health risk communication program were surveyed before and after receiving a letter conveying their breast cancer risk and a breast health genetic counselor consultation. We compared breast cancer risk estimation, anxiety, and breast cancer worry before and after risk communication and evaluated the relationship of anxiety and breast cancer worry to risk estimation accuracy. RESULTS: Women substantially overestimated their lifetime breast cancer risk, and risk communication somewhat mitigated this overestimation (49% pre-intervention, 42% post-intervention, 13% Gail model risk estimate, P < .001). Both general anxiety and breast cancer worry declined significantly after risk communication in women with high baseline anxiety. Baseline anxiety and breast cancer worry were essentially unrelated to risk estimation accuracy, but risk communication increased alignment of worry with accuracy of risk assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Personalized communication about breast cancer risk was associated with modestly improved risk estimation accuracy in women with relatively low anxiety and less anxiety and breast cancer worry in women with higher anxiety. We detected no negative consequences of informing women about elevated breast cancer risk.

Implementing a Population-Based Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Program.

BACKGROUND: Personalized breast cancer risk assessment is important in identifying and managing women at increased risk for breast cancer. However, there has been little evaluation of the practical aspects of implementing a population-based program that identifies and refers high-risk patients for further evaluation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We implemented a semiautomated approach to collect personal and family history to identify women at high risk of breast cancer. On the basis of the survey, women identified as elevated risk received letters inviting them to telephone consultations with licensed breast health genetic counselors (BHGCs). High-risk women's history was verified and counseling and referrals provided, as appropriate. RESULTS: Among 20,558 women screened, 2000 (9.7%) women were identified as high risk on the basis of patient initial report. However, most (1,580) were excluded from receiving risk communication after BHGC review of risk information with the woman or because of previous attention to breast cancer risk or an abnormal mammogram. Among 420 subjects who received risk letters, 225 received a BHGC consultation. Of these 225 women, 63 were reclassified as average risk, 158 were referred to high-risk clinics, and 5 consultations were incomplete after determining that further information was needed. Of the 158 women referred to high-risk breast clinics, 51 attended an appointment. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the complex nature of a population-based breast cancer screening program in a clinical setting and shows the substantial effort needed to identify newly discovered women at high risk for breast cancer and refer them to appropriate services.

Addressing Hereditary Cancer Risk at the End of Life.

Oncology guidelines clearly outline evidence-based recommendations for patients with newly diagnosed cancer to help oncologists determine which patients are appropriate for a genetic assessment. Ideally, patients with newly diagnosed cancer, who have personal or family histories suggestive of hereditary cancer predisposition, are referred for genetics work up in the nonurgent setting. However, in some cases, a genetics work up is delayed until the end of life. This is a time of heightened stress and additional obstacles, including discordance between family members regarding the obtainment of genetic information, paying for testing, selecting a surrogate to receive and disperse information in the case of a patient's death, and the use of DNA banking for future evaluation. To meaningfully participate and support patients, family members, and our colleagues facing requests at the end of life for genetic testing, we provide a practical approach and highlight resources to effectively engage in this rising challenge.

A Rapid Systematic Review of Outcomes Studies in Genetic Counseling.

As healthcare reimbursement is increasingly tied to value-of-service, it is critical for the genetic counselor (GC) profession to demonstrate the value added by GCs through outcomes research. We conducted a rapid systematic literature review to identify outcomes of genetic counseling. Web of Science (including PubMed) and CINAHL databases were systematically searched to identify articles meeting the following criteria: 1) measures were assessed before and after genetic counseling (pre-post design) or comparisons were made between a GC group vs. a non-GC group (comparative cohort design); 2) genetic counseling outcomes could be assessed independently of genetic testing outcomes, and 3) genetic counseling was conducted by masters-level genetic counselors, or non-physician providers. Twenty-three papers met the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies were in the cancer genetic setting and the most commonly measured outcomes included knowledge, anxiety or distress, satisfaction, perceived risk, genetic testing (intentions or receipt), health behaviors, and decisional conflict. Results suggest that genetic counseling can lead to increased knowledge, perceived personal control, positive health behaviors, and improved risk perception accuracy as well as decreases in anxiety, cancer-related worry, and decisional conflict. However, further studies are needed to evaluate a wider array of outcomes in more diverse genetic counseling settings.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian, Version 2.2017.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian provide recommendations for genetic testing and counseling for hereditary cancer syndromes and risk management recommendations for patients who are diagnosed with a syndrome. Guidelines focus on syndromes associated with an increased risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer. The NCCN Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian panel meets at least annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant new data from publications and abstracts, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. The NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's discussion and most recent recommendations regarding risk management for carriers of moderately penetrant genetic mutations associated with breast and/or ovarian cancer.

Breast Cancer Screening in the Precision Medicine Era: Risk-Based Screening in a Population-Based Trial.

Ongoing controversy over the optimal approach to breast cancer screening has led to discordant professional society recommendations, particularly in women age 40 to 49 years. One potential solution is risk-based screening, where decisions around the starting age, stopping age, frequency, and modality of screening are based on individual risk to maximize the early detection of aggressive cancers and minimize the harms of screening through optimal resource utilization. We present a novel approach to risk-based screening that integrates clinical risk factors, breast density, a polygenic risk score representing the cumulative effects of genetic variants, and sequencing for moderate- and high-penetrance germline mutations. We demonstrate how thresholds of absolute risk estimates generated by our prediction tools can be used to stratify women into different screening strategies (biennial mammography, annual mammography, annual mammography with adjunctive magnetic resonance imaging, defer screening at this time) while informing the starting age of screening for women age 40 to 49 years. Our risk thresholds and corresponding screening strategies are based on current evidence but need to be tested in clinical trials. The Women Informed to Screen Depending On Measures of risk (WISDOM) Study, a pragmatic, preference-tolerant randomized controlled trial of annual vs personalized screening, will study our proposed approach. WISDOM will evaluate the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of risk-based screening beginning in the fall of 2016. The adaptive design of this trial allows continued refinement of our risk thresholds as the trial progresses, and we discuss areas where we anticipate emerging evidence will impact our approach.

Duodenal-Jejunal Flexure GI Stromal Tumor Frequently Heralds Somatic NF1 and Notch Pathway Mutations.

PURPOSE: GI stromal tumors (GISTs) are commonly associated with somatic mutations in KIT and PDGFRA. However, a subset arises from mutations in NF1, most commonly associated with neurofibromatosis type 1. We define the anatomic distribution of NF1 alterations in GIST. METHODS: We describe the demographic/clinicopathologic features of 177 patients from two institutions whose GISTs underwent next-generation sequencing of ≥315 cancer-related genes. RESULTS: We initially identified six (9.7%) of 62 GISTs with NF1 genomic alterations from the first cohort. Of these six patients, five (83.3%) had unifocal tumors at the duodenal-jejunal flexure (DJF). Two additional patients with DJF GISTs had non-NF1 (KIT and BRAF) genomic alterations. After excluding one DJF GIST with an NF1 single nucleotide polymorphism, four (57.1%) of seven sequenced DJF tumors demonstrated deleterious NF1 alterations, whereas only one (1.8%) of 55 sequenced non-DJF GISTs had a deleterious NF1 somatic mutation (P < .001). One patient with DJF GIST had a germline NF1 variant that was associated with incomplete penetrance of clinical neurofibromatosis type 1 features along with a somatic NF1 mutation. Of the five DJF GISTs with any NF1 alteration, three (60%) had KIT mutations, and three (60%) had Notch pathway mutations (NOTCH2, MAML2, CDC73). We validated these findings in a second cohort of 115 GISTs, where two (40%) of five unifocal NF1-mutated GISTs arose at the DJF, and one of these also had a Notch pathway mutation (EP300). CONCLUSION: Broad genomic profiling of adult GISTs has revealed that NF1 alterations are enriched in DJF GISTs. These tumors also may harbor concurrent activating KIT and/or inactivating Notch pathway mutations. In some cases, germline NF1 genetic testing may be appropriate for patients with DJF GISTs.