Managing Pandora's Box: Familial Expectations around the Return of (Future) Germline Results.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric oncology patients are increasingly being offered germline testing to diagnose underlying cancer predispositions. Meanwhile, as understanding of variant pathogenicity evolves, planned reanalysis of genomic results has been suggested. Little is known regarding the types of genomic information that parents and their adolescent children with cancer prefer to receive at the time of testing or their expectations around the future return of genomic results. METHODS: Parents and adolescent children with cancer eligible for genomic testing for cancer predisposition were surveyed regarding their attitudes and expectations for receiving current and future germline results (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02530658). RESULTS: All parents (100%) desired to learn about results for treatable or preventable conditions, with 92.4% wanting results even when there is no treatment or prevention. Parents expressed less interest in receiving uncertain results for themselves (88.3%) than for their children (95.3%). Most parents (95.9%) and adolescents (87.9%) believed that providers have a responsibility to share new or updated germline results indefinitely or at any point during follow-up care. Fewer parents (67.5%) indicated that they would want results if their child was deceased: 10.3% would not want to be contacted, 19.3% were uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: Expectations for return of new or updated genomic results are high among pediatric oncology families, although up to one third of parents have reservations about receiving such information in the event of their child's death. These results underscore the importance of high-quality pre-and post-test counseling, conducted by individuals trained in consenting around genomic testing to elicit family preferences and align expectations around the return of germline results.

Knowledge Is Power: Benefits, Risks, Hopes, and Decision-Making Reported by Parents Consenting to Next-Generation Sequencing for Children and Adolescents with Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To qualitatively describe parent perspectives of next-generation genomic sequencing (NGS) for their children with cancer, including perceived benefits, risks, hopes/expectations, and decision-making process when consenting or not consenting to NGS and prior to result disclosure. DATA SOURCES: Qualitative interviews were used. CONCLUSION: Altruism is an important factor in parents consenting to NGS testing, as well as making sense of their child's cancer and legacy building. Parents described realistic hopes and expectations associated with NGS participation. Although parents endorsed the likelihood of no medical benefit, those consenting to NGS felt there was no reason not to participate. Parents declining participation expressed avoidance of worry and parent guilt if a germline variant were to be disclosed. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: As NGS evolves into a component of the routine diagnostic workup for pediatric cancer patients, genetic nurses play a role in conducting informed consent conversations and ensuring that patients and families have realistic hopes and expectations associated with NGS.

Speaking genomics to parents offered germline testing for cancer predisposition: Use of a 2-visit consent model.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer are increasingly offered genomic sequencing, including germline testing for cancer predisposition or other disorders. Such testing is unfamiliar to patients and families, and clear communication is needed to introduce genomic concepts and convey risk and benefit information. METHODS: Parents of children with cancer were offered the opportunity to have their children's tumor and germline examined with clinical genomic sequencing. Families were introduced to the study with a 2-visit informed consent model. Baseline genetic knowledge and self-reported literacy/numeracy were collected before a study introduction visit, during which basic concepts related to genomic sequencing were discussed. Information was reinforced during a second visit, during which informed consent was obtained and a posttest was administered. RESULTS: As reflected by the percentage of correct answers on the pretest and posttest assessments, this model increased genetic knowledge by 11.1% (from 77.8% to 88.9%; P < .0001) in 121 parents participating in both the study introduction and consent visits. The percentage of parents correctly identifying the meaning of somatic and germline mutations increased significantly (from 18% to 59% [somatic] and from 31% to 64% [germline]; P < .0001). Nevertheless, these concepts remained unfamiliar to one-third of the parents. No relation was identified between the change in the overall percentage of correct answers and self-reported literacy, numeracy, or demographics. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a 2-visit communication model improved knowledge of concepts relevant to genomic sequencing, particularly differences between somatic and germline testing; however, these areas remained confusing to many participants, and reinforcement may be necessary to achieve complete understanding.

Efficient construction of producer cell lines for a SIN lentiviral vector for SCID-X1 gene therapy by concatemeric array transfection.

Retroviral vectors containing internal promoters, chromatin insulators, and self-inactivating (SIN) long terminal repeats (LTRs) may have significantly reduced genotoxicity relative to the conventional retroviral vectors used in recent, otherwise successful clinical trials. Large-scale production of such vectors is problematic, however, as the introduction of SIN vectors into packaging cells cannot be accomplished with the traditional method of viral transduction. We have derived a set of packaging cell lines for HIV-based lentiviral vectors and developed a novel concatemeric array transfection technique for the introduction of SIN vector genomes devoid of enhancer and promoter sequences in the LTR. We used this method to derive a producer cell clone for a SIN lentiviral vector expressing green fluorescent protein, which when grown in a bioreactor generated more than 20 L of supernatant with titers above 10(7) transducing units (TU) per milliliter. Further refinement of our technique enabled the rapid generation of whole populations of stably transformed cells that produced similar titers. Finally, we describe the construction of an insulated, SIN lentiviral vector encoding the human interleukin 2 receptor common gamma chain (IL2RG) gene and the efficient derivation of cloned producer cells that generate supernatants with titers greater than 5 x 10(7) TU/mL and that are suitable for use in a clinical trial for X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID-X1).

Intravascular administration of tumor tropic neural progenitor cells permits targeted delivery of interferon-beta and restricts tumor growth in a murine model of disseminated neuroblastoma.

BACKGROUND: Interferon-beta (IFN-beta) has potent antitumor activity; however, systemic toxicity has limited its clinical use. We investigated the potential of targeted delivery using tumor-tropic neural progenitor cells (NPCs) transduced to express human IFN-beta (hIFN-beta). METHODS: Disseminated neuroblastoma was established in SCID mice by tail vein injection of tumor cells. Fourteen days after tumor cell inoculation, systemic disease was confirmed with bioluminescence imaging (BLI). Mice were then treated by intravenous injection of human F3.C1 NPCs that had been transduced with a replication deficient adenovirus to overexpress hIFN-beta (F3-IFN-beta). Two injections were given: the first at 14 days and the second at 28 days following tumor cell injection. Control mice received NPCs transduced with empty vector adenovirus at the same time points. Progression of disease was monitored using BLI. At sacrifice, organ weights and histology further evaluated tumor burden. RESULTS: After initiation of therapy, BLI demonstrated a significant decrease in the rate of disease progression in mice receiving F3-IFN-beta. At necropsy, control mice had bulky tumor replacing the liver and kidneys, as well as extensive retroperitoneal and mediastinal adenopathy. Impressively, these sites within mice receiving F3-IFN-beta therapy appeared grossly normal with the exception of small nodules within the kidneys of some of the F3-IFN-beta-treated mice. The accumulation of F3.C1 cells within sites of tumor growth was confirmed by fluorescence imaging. Importantly, systemic levels of hIFN-beta in the treated mice remained below detectable levels. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that in this model of disseminated neuroblastoma, the tumor-tropic property of F3.C1 NPCs was exploited to target delivery of IFN-beta to disseminated tissue foci, resulting in significant tumor growth delay. The described novel approach for effective IFN-beta therapy may circumvent limitations associated with the systemic toxicity of IFN-beta.