Predictive Genetic Testing and Alternatives to Face to Face Results Disclosure: A Retrospective Review of Patients Preference for Alternative Modes of BRCA 1 and 2 Results Disclosure in the Republic of Ireland.

The traditional model of providing cancer predictive testing services is changing. Many genetic centres are now offering a choice to patients in how they receive their results instead of the typical face-to-face disclosure. In view of this shift in practice and the increasing demand on the ROI cancer predictive testing service, a 2 year retrospective study on patient preference in how to receive a Breast Cancer (BRCA) predictive result was carried out. Results showed that 71.7 % of respondents would have liked to have the option of obtaining their results by telephone or by letter. However, when asked about their actual experience of BRCA predictive results disclosure 40.6 % did still value the face-to-face contact, while 44.9 % would still have preferred to receive results by either post or telephone. No significant difference was found between males and females (p > 0.05) and those who tested negative or positive for the BRCA mutation (p > 0.05) in wanting a choice in how their results were disclosed. While the majority expressed a wish to have a choice in how to receive their results, it is important not to underestimate the value of a face-to-face encounter in these circumstances.

Detection of novel germline mutations for breast cancer in non-BRCA1/2 families.

The identification of the breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 enhanced clinicians' ability to select high-risk individuals for aggressive surveillance and prevention, and led to the development of targeted therapies. However, BRCA1/2 mutations account for only 25% of familial breast cancer cases. To systematically identify rare, probably pathogenic variants in familial cases of breast cancer without BRCA1/2 mutations, we developed a list of 312 genes, and performed targeted DNA enrichment coupled to multiplex next-generation sequencing on 104 'BRCAx' patients and 101 geographically matched controls in Ireland. As expected, this strategy allowed us to identify mutations in several well-known high-susceptibility and moderate-susceptibility genes, including ATM (~ 5%), RAD50 (~ 3%), CHEK2 (~ 2%), TP53 (~ 1%), PALB2 (~ 1%), and MRE11A (~ 1%). However, we also identified novel pathogenic variants in 30 other genes, which, when taken together, potentially explain the etiology of the missing heritability in up to 35% of BRCAx patients. These included novel potential pathogenic mutations in MAP3K1, CASP8, RAD51B, ZNF217, CDKN2B-AS1, and ERBB2, including a splice site mutation, which we predict would generate a constitutively active HER2 protein. Taken together, this work extends our understanding of the genetics of familial breast cancer, and supports the need to implement hereditary multigene panel testing to more appropriately orientate clinical management.