scholarly journals The importance of a well-structured pancreatic screening program for familial and hereditary pancreatic cancer

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans F. A. Vasen
2016 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 806-813 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aimee L. Lucas ◽  
Adam Tarlecki ◽  
Kellie Van Beck ◽  
Casey Lipton ◽  
Arindam RoyChoudhury ◽  
...  

The Pancreas ◽  
2009 ◽  
pp. 636-642 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Carlson ◽  
William Greenhalf ◽  
Teresa A. Brentnall

Author(s):  
Tanya Dwarte ◽  
Skye McKay ◽  
Amber Johns ◽  
Katherine Tucker ◽  
Allan D. Spigelman ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Pancreatic cancer (PC) is an aggressive disease with a dismal 5-year survival rate. Surveillance of high-risk individuals is hoped to improve survival outcomes by detection of precursor lesions or early-stage malignancy. Methods Since 2011, a national high-risk cohort recruited through St Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney, has undergone prospective PC screening incorporating annual endoscopic ultrasound, formal genetic counselling and mutation analysis as appropriate. PancPRO, a Bayesian PC risk assessment model, was used to estimate 5-year and lifetime PC risks for familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) participants and this was compared to their perceived chance of pancreatic and other cancers. Genetic counselling guidelines were developed to improve consistency. Follow-up questionnaires were used to assess the role of genetic counselling and testing. Results We describe the Australian PC screening program design and recruitment strategy and the results of the first 102 individuals who have completed at least one-year of follow-up. Seventy-nine participants met the FPC criteria (≥ two first-degree relatives affected), 22 individuals had both a BRCA2 pathogenic variant and a close relative with PC and one had a clinical diagnosis of Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. Participants reported a high perceived chance of developing PC regardless of their genetic testing status. PancPRO reported FPC participants’ mean 5-year and lifetime PC risks as 1.81% (range 0.2–3.2%) and 10.17% (range 2.4–14.4%), respectively. Participants’ perceived PC chance did not correlate with their PancPRO 5-year (r = − 0.17, p = 0.128) and lifetime PC risks (r = 0.19, p = 0.091). Two-thirds felt that current genetic testing would help them, and 91% of tested participants were glad to have undergone genetic testing. Overall, 79% of participants found genetic counselling to be helpful, and 88% reported they would recommend counselling to their relatives. Conclusions Participants reported multiple benefits of genetic counselling and testing but continue to seek greater clarification about their individual PC risk. Extension of PancPRO is required to enable personalised PC risk assessment for all high-risk sub-groups. More detailed discussion of PC risk for BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers, providing a written summary in all cases and a plan for genetics review were identified as areas for improvement.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e12033-e12033
Author(s):  
Carmen Guillen-Ponce ◽  
Evelina Mocci ◽  
Julie Earl ◽  
Carmen T Guerrero ◽  
Maria Celia Calcedo ◽  
...  

e12033 Background: Inherited predisposition to Pancreatic Cancer (PC) corresponds 10% of all cases and includes members of families affected with hereditary cancer syndromes as Familial Pancreatic Cancer (FPC), Peutz-Jeghers, familial melanoma, hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, hereditary pancreatitis. An inherited predisposition in early onset PC (≤ 50 years) has also been suggested. We report preliminary data on PanFAM patients and screening of high risk individuals. Methods: PamFAM is a part of the European PANGEN PC case/control study of hereditary PC, co-ordinated by the Ramón y Cajal (RC) hospital and the Spanish National Cancer Research Center, with 16 participating hospitals. All families with clinical evidence of an inherited PC syndrome were recruited and multi-generational pedigrees were constructed. Cancer diagnoses were confirmed, when possible, by review of medical records. Blood samples and epidemiological data were collected for all participating family members. A screening program for early detection of PC, based on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), CT and circulating tumour cells (CTCs) was offered to high risk individuals. Results: Of 505 Spanish PCs collected by PANGEN, 31 (~6%) were FPC cases; 18 (58%) revealed only PC and the remaining showed clustering with other tumor types, gastric cancer was the most common (13%). Among FPC families, 3 had 3 cases of PC and the remaining had 2 cases. The mean age of diagnosis was 67 years (range 47-85), 20 male and 11 female. Four FPCs were previously diagnosed with cancer (Hodgkin lymphoma, breast and prostate cancer) and 3 with acute pancreatitis. 37 PCs with no family history of cancer were diagnosed at the age of 50 years or earlier (mean 45, range 30-50), 18 male and 19 female. Other 27 eligible families were recruited by RyC hospital, 8 (30%) with FPC and 3 (11%) with PC ≤ 50 years. A cohort of 61 high risk individuals participes in the screening study: 3 had abnormal EUS, 1 a benign pancreatic node and 1 a renal angiolipoma; one young man had 2 CTCs. Conclusions: PanFAM is the first registry in Spain collecting hereditary PC cases and it represents an important resource to identify underlying gene defects and to the development of screening methods precursor lesions detection in high risk individuals.


2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Krithika Murali ◽  
Tanya M. Dwarte ◽  
Mehrdad Nikfarjam ◽  
Katherine M. Tucker ◽  
Rhys B. Vaughan ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The Australian Pancreatic Cancer Screening Program (APCSP) offers endoscopic ultrasound surveillance for individuals at increased risk of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with all participants requiring assessment by a Familial Cancer Service before or after study enrolment. Methods Individuals aged 40–80 years (or 10 years younger than the earliest PDAC diagnosis) were eligible for APCSP study entry if they had 1) ≥ two blood relatives with PDAC (at least one of first-degree association); 2) a clinical or genetic diagnosis of Hereditary Pancreatitis or Peutz-Jeghers syndrome irrespective of PDAC family history; or 3) a known PDAC predisposition germline pathogenic variant (BRCA2, PALB2, CDKN2A, or Lynch syndrome) with ≥one PDAC-affected first- or second-degree relative. Retrospective medical record review was conducted for APCSP participants enrolled at the participating Australian hospitals from January 2011 to December 2019. We audited the genetic investigations offered by multiple Familial Cancer Services who assessed APCSP participants according to national guidelines, local clinical protocol and/or the availability of external research-funded testing, and the subsequent findings. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel. Results Of 189 kindreds (285 participants), 50 kindreds (71 participants) had a known germline pathogenic variant at enrolment (BRCA2 n = 35, PALB2 n = 6, CDKN2A n = 3, STK11 n = 3, PRSS1 n = 2, MLH1 n = 1). Forty-eight of 136 (35%) kindreds with no known germline pathogenic variant were offered mutation analysis; 89% was clinic-funded, with increasing self-funded testing since 2016. The relatively low rates of genetic testing performed reflects initial strict criteria for clinic-funded genetic testing. New germline pathogenic variants were detected in five kindreds (10.4%) after study enrolment (BRCA2 n = 3 kindreds, PALB2 n = 1, CDKN2A n = 1). Of note, only eight kindreds were reassessed by a Familial Cancer Service since enrolment, with a further 21 kindreds identified as being suitable for reassessment. Conclusion Germline pathogenic variants associated with PDAC were seen in 29.1% of our high-risk cohort (55/189 kindreds; 82/285 participants). Importantly, 10.4% of kindreds offered genetic testing were newly identified as having germline pathogenic variants, with majority being BRCA2. As genetic testing standards evolve rapidly in PDAC, 5-yearly reassessment of high-risk individuals by Familial Cancer Services is warranted.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. S. O’Neill ◽  
B. Meiser ◽  
S. Emmanuel ◽  
D. B. Williams ◽  
A. Stoita

2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (9) ◽  
pp. 1308-1314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sahar Nissim ◽  
Ignaty Leshchiner ◽  
Joseph D. Mancias ◽  
Matthew B. Greenblatt ◽  
Ophélia Maertens ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 18 (9) ◽  
pp. 2549-2552 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. R. McWilliams ◽  
W. R. Bamlet ◽  
M. de Andrade ◽  
D. N. Rider ◽  
F. J. Couch ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document