scholarly journals Germline and Somatic Tumor Testing in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: ASCO Guideline

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (11) ◽  
pp. 1222-1245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panagiotis A. Konstantinopoulos ◽  
Barbara Norquist ◽  
Christina Lacchetti ◽  
Deborah Armstrong ◽  
Rachel N. Grisham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Epithelial Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility Genes

PURPOSE To provide recommendations on genetic and tumor testing for women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer based on available evidence and expert consensus. METHODS A literature search and prospectively defined study selection criteria sought systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and comparative observational studies published from 2007 through 2019. Guideline recommendations were based on the review of the evidence. RESULTS The systematic review identified 19 eligible studies. The evidence consisted of systematic reviews of observational data, consensus guidelines, and RCTs. RECOMMENDATIONS All women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer should have germline genetic testing for BRCA1/2 and other ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. In women who do not carry a germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic BRCA1/2 variant, somatic tumor testing for BRCA1/2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants should be performed. Women with identified germline or somatic pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 genes should be offered treatments that are US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved in the upfront and the recurrent setting. Women diagnosed with clear cell, endometrioid, or mucinous ovarian cancer should be offered somatic tumor testing for mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR). Women with identified dMMR should be offered FDA-approved treatment based on these results. Genetic evaluations should be conducted in conjunction with health care providers familiar with the diagnosis and management of hereditary cancer. First- or second-degree blood relatives of a patient with ovarian cancer with a known germline pathogenic cancer susceptibility gene variant should be offered individualized genetic risk evaluation, counseling, and genetic testing. Clinical decision making should not be made based on a variant of uncertain significance. Women with epithelial ovarian cancer should have testing at the time of diagnosis.

scholarly journals Feasibility and Assessment of a Cascade Traceback Screening Program (FACTS): Protocol for a Multisite Study to Implement and Assess an Ovarian Cancer Traceback Cascade Testing Program

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 543
Author(s):  
Anna DiNucci ◽  
Nora B. Henrikson ◽  
M. Cabell Jonas ◽  
Sundeep Basra ◽  
Paula Blasi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Genetic Privacy ◽  
Program Outcomes ◽  
Cascade Testing ◽  
Program Costs

Ovarian cancer (OVCA) patients may carry genes conferring cancer risk to biological family; however, fewer than one-quarter of patients receive genetic testing. “Traceback” cascade testing —outreach to potential probands and relatives—is a possible solution. This paper outlines a funded study (U01 CA240747-01A1) seeking to determine a Traceback program’s feasibility, acceptability, effectiveness, and costs. This is a multisite prospective observational feasibility study across three integrated health systems. Informed by the Conceptual Model for Implementation Research, we will outline, implement, and evaluate the outcomes of an OVCA Traceback program. We will use standard legal research methodology to review genetic privacy statutes; engage key stakeholders in qualitative interviews to design communication strategies; employ descriptive statistics and regression analyses to evaluate the site differences in genetic testing and the OVCA Traceback testing; and assess program outcomes at the proband, family member, provider, system, and population levels. This study aims to determine a Traceback program’s feasibility and acceptability in a real-world context. It will account for the myriad factors affecting implementation, including legal issues, organizational- and individual-level barriers and facilitators, communication issues, and program costs. Project results will inform how health care providers and systems can develop effective, practical, and sustainable Traceback programs.

Improving cascade genetic testing for families with inherited pancreatic cancer (PDAC) risk: The genetic education, risk assessment and testing (GENERATE) study.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4162-TPS4162
Author(s):  
Matthew B. Yurgelun ◽  
C. Sloane Furniss ◽  
Barbara Kenner ◽  
Alison Klein ◽  
Catherine C. Lafferty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility ◽  
Genetic Counselor ◽  
Cancer Worry ◽  
Genetic Education ◽  
Degree Relative ◽  
Cascade Testing ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Germline Testing

TPS4162 Background: 4-10% of PDAC patients harbor pathogenic germline variants in cancer susceptibility genes, including APC, ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDKN2A, EPCAM, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PALB2, PMS2, STK11, and TP53. For families with such pathogenic variants, the greatest potential impact of germline testing is to identify relatives with the same pathogenic variant (cascade testing), thereby providing the opportunity for early detection and cancer interception of PDAC and other associated malignancies. Numerous factors limit cascade testing in real-world practice, including family dynamics, widespread geographic distribution of relatives, access to genetic services, and misconceptions about the importance of germline testing, such that the preventive benefits of cascade testing are often not fully realized. The primary aim of this study is to analyze two alternative strategies for cascade testing in families with inherited PDAC susceptibility. Methods: 1000 individuals (from approximately 200 families) with a confirmed pathogenic germline variant in any of the above genes in a 1st/2nd degree relative and a 1st/2nd degree relative with PDAC will be remotely enrolled through the study website (www.generatestudy.org) and randomized between two different methods of cascade testing (individuals with prior genetic testing will be ineligible): Arm 1 will undergo pre-test genetic education with a pre-recorded video and live interactive session with a genetic counselor via a web-based telemedicine platform (Doxy.me), followed by germline testing through Color Genomics; Arm 2 will undergo germline testing through Color Genomics without dedicated pre-test genetic education. Color Genomics will disclose results to study personnel and directly to participants in both arms. Participants in both arms will have the option of pursuing additional telephone-based genetic counseling through Color Genomics. The primary outcome will be uptake of cascade testing. Secondary outcomes will include participant self-reported genetic knowledge, cancer worry, distress, decisional preparedness, familial communication, and screening uptake, which will be measured via longitudinal surveys. Enrollment will begin February, 2019. Clinical trial information: NCT03762590.

scholarly journals BRCA testing in women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer: gynecologic oncologist-initiated testing compared with genetics referral

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (11) ◽  
pp. 1757-1761
Author(s):  
Sabrina Piedimonte ◽  
Joanne Power ◽  
William D Foulkes ◽  
Evan Weber ◽  
Laura Palma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Genetic Counseling ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Median Time ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Peritoneal Carcinoma ◽  
Gynecologic Oncologist ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Genetics Referral

ObjectiveUp to 15% of patients with high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma harbor a mutation in BRCA genes. Early notion of mutation status may facilitate counseling, predict prognosis, and increase access to Parp-inhibitors. The aim of this study was to examine the rate of germline genetic testing in a retrospective cohort of women with high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma to determine if a new pilot project of gynecologic oncologist-initiated genetic testing improved the rate of testing, after 1 year of implementation.MethodsGynecologic oncology-initiated genetic testing was implemented at a single university hospital center with input and collaboration from gynecological oncologists, nurses, and genetic counselors. All patients diagnosed with high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma after August 2017 were offered gynecologic oncologist- initiated genetic testing for a panel of 13 hereditary breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. Data from this group was then compared with a historic cohort of patients who received traditional genetic counseling between January 2014 and August 2017 (control group). Patients that had genetic testing through a clinical trial were excluded. The primary outcome was the uptake of genetic testing in both groups. Secondary outcomes included difference in time from diagnosis to genetic result between both cohorts. Data was analyzed using SPSS 25.0 and medians (ranges) were reported.ResultsA total of 152 women with high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma were included in this study. Between January 2014 to July 2017 there were 108 patients with high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma, among which 50.9% (n=54) underwent genetic testing following referral to genetics. The prevalence of BRCA pathogenic variants was 25.9% (14/54): 9.2% (5/54) in BRCA1 and 16.7% (9/54) in BRCA2. The median time from diagnosis to genetics referral was 53 days (range; 3–751), and median time from diagnosis to test result disclosure was 186 days (range; 15–938). After 1 year of implementation of the gynecologic oncologist-initiated genetic testing model, among 44 women diagnosed with high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma, 86.2% underwent genetic testing. The median time from diagnosis to result disclosure decreased to 58 days, representing a reduction of 128 days, or 4.27 months (P<0.001). Reasons for non-testing included refusal, death, and follow-up at another hospital. The prevalence of germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants was 21% (8/38).ConclusionGynecologic oncologist-initiated genetic testing at the time of high-grade serous ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal carcinoma diagnosis leads to increased uptake and decreased delays in testing compared with referral for traditional genetic counseling.

Breast cancer treatment according to pathogenic variants in cancer susceptibility genes in a population-based cohort.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 560-560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison W. Kurian ◽  
Kevin C. Ward ◽  
Paul Abrahamse ◽  
Ann S Hamilton ◽  
Dennis Deapen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Genetic Test ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Breast Cancer Treatment ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility Genes ◽  
To Receive

560 Background: Increasing use of germline genetic testing may have unintended consequences on breast cancer treatment. We do not know whether treatment deviates from guidelines for women with pathogenic variants (PV) in cancer susceptibility genes. Methods: SEER data for all women aged ≥20 years, diagnosed with breast cancer in 2014-15 and reported to Georgia and California registries (N = 77,588) by December 1, 2016 were linked to germline genetic testing results from 4 laboratories that did nearly all clinical testing. We examined first course of therapy (before recurrence or progression) of stage < IV patients who linked to a genetic test: bilateral mastectomy (BLM) in candidates for surgery (unilateral, stages 0-III); post-lumpectomy radiation in those with an indication (all but age ≥70, stage I, hormone receptor (HR)-positive and HER2-negative); and chemotherapy in those without a definitive indication (stage I-II, HR-positive, HER2-negative and 21-gene recurrence score < 30). We report the percent treated based on multivariable modeling, adjusted for age, race, stage, grade, insurance and socioeconomic status. Results: The table shows that 9% of patients who linked to a genetic test result had a PV (N = 1,283). Compared to women with negative results,women with BRCA1/2 PVs were more likely to receive BLM, more likely to receive chemotherapy without definitive indication, and less likely to receive indicated radiation in their first course of therapy. Lower-magnitude effects were seen with other PVs but not variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Conclusions: In a population-based setting, women with PVs in BRCA1/2 or other cancer susceptibility genes may have a higher risk of receiving locoregional and systemic treatment that does not follow guidelines. [Table: see text]

BRCAPRO Validation, Sensitivity of Genetic Testing of BRCA1/BRCA2, and Prevalence of Other Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes

2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 2701-2712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald A. Berry ◽  
Edwin S. Iversen ◽  
Daniel F. Gudbjartsson ◽  
Elaine H. Hiller ◽  
Judy E. Garber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility ◽  
Breast Cancer Susceptibility ◽  
Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Breast And Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Brca1 And Brca2 ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes

PURPOSE: To compare genetic test results for deleterious mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2 with estimated probabilities of carrying such mutations; to assess sensitivity of genetic testing; and to assess the relevance of other susceptibility genes in familial breast and ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data analyzed were from six high-risk genetic counseling clinics and concern individuals from families for which at least one member was tested for mutations at BRCA1 and BRCA2. Predictions of genetic predisposition to breast and ovarian cancer for 301 individuals were made using BRCAPRO, a statistical model and software using Mendelian genetics and Bayesian updating. Model predictions were compared with the results of genetic testing. RESULTS: Among the test individuals, 126 were Ashkenazi Jewish, three were male subjects, 243 had breast cancer, 49 had ovarian cancer, 34 were unaffected, and 139 tested positive for BRCA1 mutations and 29 for BRCA2 mutations. BRCAPRO performed well: for the 150 probands with the smallest BRCAPRO carrier probabilities (average, 29.0%), the proportion testing positive was 32.7%; for the 151 probands with the largest carrier probabilities (average, 95.2%), 78.8% tested positive. Genetic testing sensitivity was estimated to be at least 85%, with false-negatives including mutations of susceptibility genes heretofore unknown. CONCLUSION: BRCAPRO is an accurate counseling tool for determining the probability of carrying mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2. Genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 is highly sensitive, missing an estimated 15% of mutations. In the populations studied, breast cancer susceptibility genes other than BRCA1 and BRCA2 either do not exist, are rare, or are associated with low disease penetrance.

scholarly journals Using a Tailored Digital Health Intervention for Family Communication and Cascade Genetic Testing in Swiss and Korean Families With Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer: Protocol for the DIALOGUE Study

10.2196/26264 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. e26264
Author(s):  
Sue Kim ◽  
Monica Aceti ◽  
Vasiliki Baroutsou ◽  
Nicole Bürki ◽  
Maria Caiata-Zufferey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Family Communication ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Health Intervention ◽  
Cancer Predisposition ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Breast And Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Mutation Carriers

Background In hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), family communication of genetic test results is essential for cascade genetic screening, that is, identifying and testing blood relatives of known mutation carriers to determine whether they also carry the pathogenic variant, and to propose preventive and clinical management options. However, up to 50% of blood relatives are unaware of relevant genetic information, suggesting that potential benefits of genetic testing are not communicated effectively within family networks. Technology can facilitate communication and genetic education within HBOC families. Objective The aims of this study are to develop the K-CASCADE (Korean–Cancer Predisposition Cascade Genetic Testing) cohort in Korea by expanding an infrastructure developed by the CASCADE (Cancer Predisposition Cascade Genetic Testing) Consortium in Switzerland; develop a digital health intervention to support the communication of cancer predisposition for Swiss and Korean HBOC families, based on linguistic and cultural adaptation of the Family Gene Toolkit; evaluate its efficacy on primary (family communication of genetic results and cascade testing) and secondary (psychological distress, genetic literacy, active coping, and decision making) outcomes; and explore its translatability using the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance framework. Methods The digital health intervention will be available in French, German, Italian, Korean, and English and can be accessed via the web, mobile phone, or tablet (ie, device-agnostic). K-CASCADE cohort of Korean HBOC mutation carriers and relatives will be based on the CASCADE infrastructure. Narrative data collected through individual interviews or mini focus groups from 20 to 24 HBOC family members per linguistic region and 6-10 health care providers involved in genetic services will identify the local cultures and context, and inform the content of the tailored messages. The efficacy of the digital health intervention against a comparison website will be assessed in a randomized trial with 104 HBOC mutation carriers (52 in each study arm). The translatability of the digital health intervention will be assessed using survey data collected from HBOC families and health care providers. Results Funding was received in October 2019. It is projected that data collection will be completed by January 2023 and results will be published in fall 2023. Conclusions This study addresses the continuum of translational research, from developing an international research infrastructure and adapting an existing digital health intervention to testing its efficacy in a randomized controlled trial and exploring its translatability using an established framework. Adapting existing interventions, rather than developing new ones, takes advantage of previous valid experiences without duplicating efforts. Culturally sensitive web-based interventions that enhance family communication and understanding of genetic cancer risk are timely. This collaboration creates a research infrastructure between Switzerland and Korea that can be scaled up to cover other hereditary cancer syndromes. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04214210; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04214210 and CRiS KCT0005643; https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/ International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/26264

scholarly journals Spectrum and Prevalence of Pathogenic Variants in Ovarian Cancer Susceptibility Genes in a Group of 333 Patients

Cancers ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magdalena Koczkowska ◽  
Natalia Krawczynska ◽  
Maciej Stukan ◽  
Alina Kuzniacka ◽  
Izabela Brozek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility ◽  
Clinical Importance ◽  
Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Polish Population ◽  
Loss Of Function ◽  
Brca1 And Brca2 ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Personalized Risk Assessment

Constitutional loss-of-function pathogenic variants in the tumor suppressor genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 are widely associated with an elevated risk of ovarian cancer (OC). As only ~15% of OC individuals carry the BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants, the identification of other potential OC-susceptibility genes is of great clinical importance. Here, we established the prevalence and spectrum of the germline pathogenic variants in the BRCA1/2 and 23 other cancer-related genes in a large Polish population of 333 unselected OC cases. Approximately 21% of cases (71/333) carried the BRCA1/2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants, with c.5266dup (p.Gln1756Profs*74) and c.3700_3704del (p.Val1234Glnfs*8) being the most prevalent. Additionally, ~6% of women (20/333) were carriers of the pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in other cancer-related genes, with NBN and CHEK2 reported as the most frequently mutated, accounting for 1.8% (6/333) and 1.2% (4/333) of cases, respectively. We also found ten pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in other genes: 1/333 in APC, 1/333 in ATM, 2/333 in BLM, 1/333 in BRIP1, 1/333 in MRE11A, 2/333 in PALB2, 1/333 in RAD50, and 1/333 in RAD51C, accounting for 50% of all detected variants in moderate- and low-penetrant genes. Our findings confirmed the presence of the additional OC-associated genes in the Polish population that may improve the personalized risk assessment of these individuals.

scholarly journals Genetic Testing to Guide Risk-Stratified Screens for Breast Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ava Willoughby ◽  
Paul Andreassen ◽  
Amanda Toland
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility ◽  
Cancer Surveillance ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Breast And Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Uncertain Significance

Breast cancer screening modalities and guidelines continue to evolve and are increasingly based on risk factors, including genetic risk and a personal or family history of cancer. Here, we review genetic testing of high-penetrance hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genes, including BRCA1 and BRCA2, for the purpose of identifying high-risk individuals who would benefit from earlier screening and more sensitive methods such as magnetic resonance imaging. We also consider risk-based screening in the general population, including whether every woman should be genetically tested for high-risk genes and the potential use of polygenic risk scores. In addition to enabling early detection, the results of genetic screens of breast cancer susceptibility genes can be utilized to guide decision-making about when to elect prophylactic surgeries that reduce cancer risk and the choice of therapeutic options. Variants of uncertain significance, especially missense variants, are being identified during panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. A finding of a variant of uncertain significance does not provide a basis for increased cancer surveillance or prophylactic procedures. Given that variant classification is often challenging, we also consider the role of multifactorial statistical analyses by large consortia and functional tests for this purpose.

scholarly journals Cascading After Peridiagnostic Cancer Genetic Testing: An Alternative to Population-Based Screening

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (13) ◽  
pp. 1398-1408 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Offit ◽  
Kaitlyn A. Tkachuk ◽  
Zsofia K. Stadler ◽  
Michael F. Walsh ◽  
Hector Diaz-Zabala ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Family Size ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility ◽  
The United States ◽  
Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Cancer Genetic ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility Genes

PURPOSE Despite advances in DNA sequencing technology and expanded medical guidelines, the vast majority of individuals carrying pathogenic variants of common cancer susceptibility genes have yet to be identified. An alternative to population-wide genetic screening of healthy individuals would exploit the trend for genetic testing at the time of cancer diagnosis to guide therapy and prevention, combined with augmented familial diffusion or “cascade” of genomic risk information. METHODS Using a multiple linear regression model, we derived the time interval to detect an estimated 3.9 million individuals in the United States with a pathogenic variant in 1 of 18 cancer susceptibility genes. We analyzed the impact of the proportion of incident patients sequenced, varying observed frequencies of pathogenic germline variants in patients with cancer, differential rates of diffusion of genetic information in families, and family size. RESULTS The time to detect inherited cancer predisposing variants in the population is affected by the extent of cascade to first-, second-, and third-degree relatives (FDR, SDR, TDR, respectively), family size, prevalence of mutations in patients with cancer, and the proportion of patients with cancer sequenced. In a representative scenario, assuming a 7% prevalence of pathogenic variants across cancer types, an average family size of 3 per generation, and 15% of incident patients with cancer in the United States undergoing germline testing, the time to detect all 3.9 million individuals with pathogenic variants in 18 cancer susceptibility genes would be 46.2, 22.3, 13.6, and 9.9 years if 10%, 25%, 50%, and 70%, respectively, of all FDR, SDR, and TDR were tested for familial mutations. CONCLUSION Peridiagnostic and cascade cancer genetic testing offers an alternative strategy to achieve population-wide identification of cancer susceptibility mutations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document