Noninvasive Prenatal Screening for Single-Gene Disorders.

Single-gene disorders (SGDs), also known as monogenic disorders, are caused by pathogenic variants at individual loci. Prenatal cell-free DNA screening for SGDs has been investigated for decades. Detecting paternal and de novo variants may be somewhat straightforward, whereas detecting maternally inherited variants poses a significant challenge. Although commercially available in both high-risk and low-risk patients, many limitations exist. The use of SGDs is not supported by professional medical societies.

Management of individuals with germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in CHEK2: A clinical practice resource of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).

PURPOSE: Although the role of CHEK2 germline pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition is well known, resources for managing CHEK2 heterozygotes in clinical practice are limited. METHODS: An international workgroup developed guidance on clinical management of CHEK2 heterozygotes informed by peer-reviewed publications from PubMed. RESULTS: Although CHEK2 is considered a moderate penetrance gene, cancer risks may be considered as a continuous variable, which are influenced by family history and other modifiers. Consequently, early cancer detection and prevention for CHEK2 heterozygotes should be guided by personalized risk estimates. Such estimates may result in both downgrading lifetime breast cancer risks to those similar to the general population or upgrading lifetime risk to a level at which CHEK2 heterozygotes are offered high-risk breast surveillance according to country-specific guidelines. Risk-reducing mastectomy should be guided by personalized risk estimates and shared decision making. Colorectal and prostate cancer surveillance should be considered based on assessment of family history. For CHEK2 heterozygotes who develop cancer, no specific targeted medical treatment is recommended at this time. CONCLUSION: Systematic prospective data collection is needed to establish the spectrum of CHEK2-associated cancer risks and to determine yet-unanswered questions, such as the outcomes of surveillance, response to cancer treatment, and survival after cancer diagnosis.

Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) for fetal chromosome abnormalities in a general-risk population: An evidence-based clinical guideline of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).

PURPOSE: This workgroup aimed to develop an evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the use of noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) for pregnant individuals at general risk for fetal trisomy 21, trisomy 18, or trisomy 13 and to evaluate the utility of NIPS for other chromosomal disorders. METHODS: The NIPS Evidence-Based Guideline Work Group (n = 7) relied on the results from the recent American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) systematic review to form the evidentiary basis of this guideline. Workgroup members used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Evidence to Decision framework to draft recommendations. The guideline underwent extensive internal and external peer review with a public comment period before approval by the ACMG Board of Directors. RESULTS: Evidence consistently demonstrated improved accuracy of NIPS compared with traditional screening methods for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 in singleton and twin gestations. Identification of rare autosomal trisomies and other microdeletion syndromes with NIPS is an emerging area of interest. CONCLUSION: ACMG strongly recommends NIPS over traditional screening methods for all pregnant patients with singleton and twin gestations for fetal trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and strongly recommends NIPS be offered to patients to screen for fetal sex chromosome aneuploidy.

Cancer Risk C (CR-C), a functional genomics test is a sensitive and rapid test for germline mismatch repair deficiency.

PURPOSE: Heritable pathogenic variants in the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) pathway cause Lynch syndrome, a condition that significantly increases risk of colorectal and other cancers. At least half of individuals tested using gene panel sequencing have a variant of uncertain significance or no variant identified leading to no diagnosis. To fill this diagnostic gap, we developed Cancer Risk C (CR-C), a flow variant assay test. METHODS: In response to treatment with an alkylating agent, individual assays of the nuclear translocation of MLH1, MSH2, BARD1, PMS2, and BRCA2 proteins and the nuclear phosphorylation of the ATM and ATR proteins distinguished pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) from benign/likely benign variants in MMR genes. RESULTS: A risk classification score based on MLH1, MSH2, and ATR assays was 100% sensitive and 98% specific. Causality of MMR P/LP variants was shown through gene editing and rescue. In individuals with suspected Lynch syndrome but no P/LP, CR-C identified most (73%) as having germline MMR defects. Direct comparison of CR-C on matched blood samples and lymphoblastoid cell lines yielded comparable results (r2 > 0.9). CONCLUSION: For identifying germline MMR defects, CR-C provides augmentation to traditional panel sequencing through greater accuracy, shorter turnaround time (48 hours), and performance on blood with minimal sample handling.

Prediction of breast cancer risk based on flow variant analysis of circulating peripheral blood mononuclear cells.

Identifying women at high risk for developing breast cancer is potentially lifesaving. Patients with pathogenic genetic variants can embark on a program of surveillance for early detection, chemoprevention, and/or prophylactic surgery. Newly diagnosed cancer patients can also use the results of gene panel sequencing to make decisions about surgery; therefore, rapid turnaround time for results is critical. Cancer Risk B (CR-B), a test that uses flow variant assays to assess the effects of variants in the DNA double-strand break repair, was applied to two groups of subjects who underwent coincidental gene panel testing, thereby allowing an assessment of sensitivity, specificity and accuracy, and utility for annotating variants of uncertain significance (VUS). The test was compared in matched peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and lymphoblastoid cells (LCLs) and tested for rescue in LCLs with gene transfer. The CR-B phenotype demonstrated a bimodal distribution: CR-B+ indicative of DSB repair defects, and CR-B-, indicative of wild-type repair. When comparing matched LCLs and PBMCs and inter-day tests, CR-B yielded highly reproducible results. The CR-B- phenotype was rescued by gene transfer using wild-type cDNA expression plasmids. The CR-B- phenotype predicted VUS as benign or likely benign. CR-B could represent a rapid alternative to panel sequencing for women with cancer and identifying women at high risk for cancer and is a useful adjunct for annotating VUS.

Impact of introducing cell-free DNA screening into clinical care on first trimester ultrasound.

OBJECTIVE: First-trimester ultrasound is an important component of prenatal care. We investigated the impact of introducing cell-free DNA (cfDNA) aneuploidy screening into routine care, on performance of first-trimester ultrasound. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients who had prenatal care at a tertiary referral center. We compared the performance of any first-trimester ultrasound between three different aneuploidy screening protocols, used consecutively during the study period: (1) combined first-trimester screening (FTS); (2) FTS and cfDNA offered together; (3) patients requested to choose between FTS and cfDNA. Secondary outcomes included performance of nuchal translucency (NT), aneuploidy screens and diagnostic genetic procedures. RESULTS: The number of patients undergoing first-trimester ultrasound remained similar with the second protocol but decreased in the third (68.7% vs. 40.9%, OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.25-0.4, p < 0.001). Diagnostic procedures decreased between protocol 1 and 2 (7.6% vs. 4.4%, OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37-0.93, p = 0.02) while NT scans decreased between protocol 2 and 3 (6.8% vs. 1.3%, OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.09-0.4, p < 0.001). The rate of FTS decreased over the study period and less women had cfDNA when they had to choose one method (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Introducing cfDNA screening as an alternative to FTS, resulted in fewer patients receiving ultrasound in the first-trimester.

Single-cell analysis of somatic mutation burden in mammary epithelial cells of pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Inherited germline mutations in the breast cancer gene 1 (BRCA1) or BRCA2 genes (herein BRCA1/2) greatly increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancer, presumably by elevating somatic mutational errors as a consequence of deficient DNA repair. However, this has never been directly demonstrated by a comprehensive analysis of the somatic mutational landscape of primary, noncancer, mammary epithelial cells of women diagnosed with pathogenic BRCA1/2 germline mutations. Here, we used an accurate, single-cell whole-genome sequencing approach to first show that telomerized primary mammary epithelial cells heterozygous for a highly penetrant BRCA1 variant displayed a robustly elevated mutation frequency as compared with their isogenic control cells. We then demonstrated a small but statistically significant increase in mutation frequency in mammary epithelial cells isolated from the breast of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers as compared with those obtained from age-matched controls with no genetically increased risk for breast cancer.

Cell-free DNA screening for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 in pregnancies at low and high risk for aneuploidy with genetic confirmation.

BACKGROUND: Cell-free DNA noninvasive prenatal screening for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 has been rapidly adopted into clinical practice. However, previous studies are limited by a lack of follow-up genetic testing to confirm the outcomes and accurately assess test performance, particularly in women at a low risk for aneuploidy. OBJECTIVE: To measure and compare the performance of cell-free DNA screening for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 between women at a low and high risk for aneuploidy in a large, prospective cohort with genetic confirmation of results STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter prospective observational study at 21 centers in 6 countries. Women who had single-nucleotide-polymorphism-based cell-free DNA screening for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 were enrolled. Genetic confirmation was obtained from prenatal or newborn DNA samples. The test performance and test failure (no-call) rates were assessed for the cohort, and women with low and high previous risks for aneuploidy were compared. An updated cell-free DNA algorithm blinded to the pregnancy outcome was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 20,194 women were enrolled at a median gestational age of 12.6 weeks (interquartile range, 11.6-13.9). The genetic outcomes were confirmed in 17,851 cases (88.4%): 13,043 (73.1%) low-risk and 4808 (26.9%) high-risk cases for aneuploidy. Overall, 133 trisomies were diagnosed (100 trisomy 21; 18 trisomy 18; 15 trisomy 13). The cell-free DNA screen positive rate was lower in the low-risk vs the high-risk group (0.27% vs 2.2%; P<.0001). The sensitivity and specificity were similar between the groups. The positive predictive value for the low- and high-risk groups was 85.7% vs 97.5%; P=.058 for trisomy 21; 50.0% vs 81.3%; P=.283 for trisomy 18; and 62.5% vs 83.3; P=.58 for trisomy 13, respectively. Overall, 602 (3.4%) patients had no-call result after the first draw and 287 (1.61%) after including cases with a second draw. The trisomy rate was higher in the 287 cases with no-call results than patients with a result on a first draw (2.8% vs 0.7%; P=.001). The updated algorithm showed similar sensitivity and specificity to the study algorithm with a lower no-call rate. CONCLUSION: In women at a low risk for aneuploidy, single-nucleotide-polymorphism-based cell-free DNA has high sensitivity and specificity, positive predictive value of 85.7% for trisomy 21 and 74.3% for the 3 common trisomies. Patients who receive a no-call result are at an increased risk of aneuploidy and require additional investigation.

The training of future clinical geneticists: Evaluation and reflection on the ACMG Foundation for Genetic and Genomic Medicine Summer Genetics Scholars Program.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the Summer Genetics Scholars Program of the ACMG Foundation for Genetic and Genomic Medicine is to expose medical students to medical genetics and genomics early during school with the aim of increasing the number of physicians pursuing a career in this field. This survey study evaluated the Summer Genetics Scholars Program on the achievement of its goals. METHODS: Former Summer Genetics Scholars who had completed medical school were sent a 13-question survey aimed at evaluating the program and obtaining feedback about their experiences. RESULTS: Of 125 former scholars, 55 completed the survey with 2 additional participants partially completing the survey. The vast majority of former participants report either being very satisfied or satisfied with their experience (96%). CONCLUSION: Whereas most participants found their experience to be beneficial, evaluation of the initial 6 years of the program did not show an increase in the number of students entering residencies in medical genetics and genomics. It likely is too early to assess the program's true influence on entry into the field because data were only available for the first 6 years of the Summer Genetics Scholars Program, and many residents typically choose to complete another primary specialty before medical genetics and genomics.

Screening for autosomal recessive and X-linked conditions during pregnancy and preconception: a practice resource of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).

Carrier screening began 50 years ago with screening for conditions that have a high prevalence in defined racial/ethnic groups (e.g., Tay-Sachs disease in the Ashkenazi Jewish population; sickle cell disease in Black individuals). Cystic fibrosis was the first medical condition for which panethnic screening was recommended, followed by spinal muscular atrophy. Next-generation sequencing allows low cost and high throughput identification of sequence variants across many genes simultaneously. Since the phrase "expanded carrier screening" is nonspecific, there is a need to define carrier screening processes in a way that will allow equitable opportunity for patients to learn their reproductive risks using next-generation sequencing technology. An improved understanding of this risk allows patients to make informed reproductive decisions. Reproductive decision making is the established metric for clinical utility of population-based carrier screening. Furthermore, standardization of the screening approach will facilitate testing consistency. This practice resource reviews the current status of carrier screening, provides answers to some of the emerging questions, and recommends a consistent and equitable approach for offering carrier screening to all individuals during pregnancy or preconception.

Patient attitudes toward prenatal diagnostic testing during antenatal care in an urban population.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate factors that influence the decision to accept or decline diagnostic testing for pregnant women referred for genetic counseling. METHODS: Cross sectional anonymous survey of pregnant women undergoing genetic counseling at a tertiary care referral center. Subjects' perceived risk of procedure related loss and fetal chromosomal problem were obtained via survey where patients rated risk from 0 (no risk) to 10 (highest risk). RESULTS: There were no differences in sociodemographic factors between women undergoing a diagnostic procedure compared to those not undergoing a procedure. As the perceived risk for having a baby with genetic problem increased by one point, the estimated odds of having the diagnostic procedure increased by 43% controlling for the perceived risk of procedure related loss (p < .0001). Similarly, as the perceived risk of miscarriage increased by one point, the odds of having the diagnostic procedure decreased by 40%, controlling for the perceived risk of having a baby with a genetic problem (p < .0001). The main reason women cited for not undergoing a procedure was fear of procedure related loss. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women that decline diagnostic testing have a higher perceived risk of procedure related loss and lower perceived risk of fetal chromosomal abnormality than those who accept.