Universal tumor screening for lynch syndrome on colorectal cancer biopsies impacts surgical treatment decisions.

Universal tumor screening (UTS) for Lynch syndrome (LS) on colorectal cancer (CRC) can be performed on biopsies or resection specimens. The advantage of biopsies is the chance to provide preoperative genetic counseling/testing (GC/T) so patients diagnosed with LS can make informed decisions regarding resection extent. We evaluated utilization of UTS on biopsies, percentage of patients with deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) who underwent GC/T preoperatively, and whether surgical/treatment decisions were impacted. We performed a retrospective review of medical records to assess CRC cases with dMMR immunohistochemical staining from 1/1/2017 to 2/26/2021. 1144 CRC patients had UTS using MMR immunohistochemistry; 559 biopsies (48.9%) and 585 resections (51.1%). The main reason UTS was not performed on biopsy was it occurred outside our health system. 58 (5%) of CRCs were dMMR and did not have MLH1 promoter hypermethylation (if MLH1 and PMS2 absent). 28/58 (48.3%) of dMMR cases were diagnosed on biopsy. Of those 28, 14 (50%) eventually underwent GC/T, and 7 (25%) had GT results prior to surgery. One of the 7 had incomplete documentation of results affecting their treatment plan. Of the remaining 6 with complete documentation, 5 underwent surgery and one was treated with immunotherapy only. Three patients elected a more extensive surgery. 6/28 (21.4%) dMMR patients identified on biopsy made an informed surgical/treatment decision based on their dMMR status/LS diagnosis. When applied, UTS on biopsy followed by genetic counseling and testing informs surgical decision-making. Process and implementation strategies are in place to overcome challenges to more broadly optimize this approach.

Mainstreaming germline genetic testing for patients with pancreatic cancer increases uptake.

Germline genetic testing is recommended for all patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) but uptake rates are low. We implemented a mainstreaming program in oncology clinics to increase testing for PC patients. Genetic counselors trained oncology providers to offer a standardized multigene panel and obtain informed consent using an educational video. Pre-test genetic counseling was available upon request. Otherwise, patients with identified pathogenic variants, strong family history, or questions regarding their results were referred for post-test genetic counseling. We measured rates of testing and genetic counseling visits. From September 2019 to April 2021, 245 patients with PC underwent genetic testing. This represents a 6.5-fold increase in germline testing volume (95% confidence interval 5.2-8.1) compared to previous years. At least one pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant (PV/LPV) was found in 34 (13.9%) patients, including 17 (6.9%) PV/LPVs in high or moderate risk genes and 18 (7.3%) in low risk or recessive genes. Five (2.0%) PVs had implications on treatment selection. 22 of the positive patients (64.7%) and an additional 8 PC patients (1 negative, 3 VUS, and 4 pre-test) underwent genetic counseling during the study period. Genetic counselors saw 2.0 PC patients/month prior to this project, 1.6 PC patients/month during this project, and would have seen 2.2 PC patients/month if all patients with pathogenic variants attended post-test counseling. Conclusions Mainstreaming genetic testing expands access for PC patients without overwhelming genetic counseling resources.