Age of first cancer diagnosis and survival in Bloom syndrome.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to describe the spectrum of cancers observed in Bloom Syndrome and the observed survival and age of first cancer diagnosis in Bloom syndrome as these are not well-defined. METHODS: Data from the Bloom Syndrome Registry (BSR) was used for this study. Cancer history, ages of first cancer diagnosis, and ages of death were compiled from the BSR and analyzed. RESULTS: Among the 290 individuals in the BSR, 155 (53%) participants developed 251 malignant neoplasms; 100 (65%) were diagnosed with 1 malignancy, whereas the remaining 55 (35%) developed multiple malignancies. Of the 251 neoplasms, 83 (33%) were hematologic and 168 (67%) were solid tumors. Hematologic malignancies (leukemia and lymphoma) were more common than any of the solid tumors. The most commonly observed solid tumors were colorectal, breast, and oropharyngeal. The cumulative incidence of any malignancy by age 40 was 83%. The median survival for all participants in the BSR was 36.2 years. There were no significant differences in time to first cancer diagnosis or survival by genotype among the study participants. CONCLUSION: We describe the spectrum of cancers observed in Bloom syndrome and the observed survival and age of first cancer diagnosis in Bloom syndrome. We also highlight the significant differences in survival and age of diagnosis seen among different tumor types and genotypes.

Regulation of Laboratory-Developed Tests in Preventive Oncology: Emerging Needs and Opportunities.

Cancer predictive or diagnostic assays, offered as Laboratory-Developed Tests (LDTs), have been subject to regulatory authority and enforcement discretion by the US Food and Drug Administration. Many LDTs enter the market without US Food and Drug Administration or any regulatory review. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments focuses on analytic performance, but has limited oversight of the quality or utility of LDTs, including whether patients have been harmed as a result of their use. Increasingly, LDTs for cancer risk or early detection have been marketed directly to consumers, with many LDT developers depicting these tests, requested by patients but ordered by personal or company-associated physicians, as procedures falling under the practice of medicine. This patchwork of regulation and enforcement uncertainty regarding LDTs and public concerns about accuracy of tests given emergency authorization during the COVID-19 pandemic led to the Verifying Accurate Leading-edge IVCT (in vitro clinical test) Development Act of 2021. This pending federal legislation represents an opportunity to harmonize regulatory policies and address growing concerns over quality, utility, and safety of LDTs for cancer genomics, including tests marketed directly to consumers. We review here questions regarding the potential benefits and harms of some cancer-related LDTs for cancer risk and presymptomatic molecular diagnosis, increasingly marketed to oncologists or directly to the worried well. We offer specific proposals to strengthen oversight of the accuracy and clinical utility of cancer genetic testing to ensure public safety.