Prevalence of Variant Reclassification Following Hereditary Cancer Genetic Testing

Canadian College of Medical Geneticists: clinical practice advisory document - responsibility to recontact for reinterpretation of clinical genetic testing

BACKGROUND

Advances in technology and knowledge have facilitated both an increase in the number of patient variants reported and variants reclassified. While there is currently no duty to recontact for reclassified genetic variants, there may be a responsibility. The purpose of this clinical practice advisory document is to provide healthcare practitioners guidance for recontact of previously identified and classified variants, suggest methods for recontact, and principles to consider, taking account patient safety, feasibility, ethical considerations, health service capacity and resource constraints. The target audience are practitioners who order genetic testing, follow patients who have undergone genetic testing and those analysing and reporting genetic testing.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary group of laboratory and ordering clinicians, patient representatives, ethics and legal researchers and a genetic counsellor from the Canadian Association of Genetic Counsellors reviewed the existing literature and guidelines on responsibility to recontact in a clinical context to make recommendations. Comments were collected from the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists (CCMG) Education, Ethics, and Public Policy, Clinical Practice and Laboratory Practice committees, and the membership at large.

RESULTS

Following incorporation of feedback, and external review by the Canadian Association of Genetic Counsellors and patient groups, the document was approved by the CCMG Board of Directors. The CCMG is the Canadian organisation responsible for certifying laboratory and medical geneticists who provide medical genetics services, and for establishing professional and ethical standards for clinical genetics services in Canada.

CONCLUSION

The document describes the ethical and practical factors and suggests a shared responsibility between patients, ordering clinician and laboratory practitioners.

Patterns and Frequency of Pathogenic Germline Variants Among Prostate Cancer Patients Utilizing Multi-Gene Panel Genetic Testing

Background

Germline genetic testing (GGT) has significant implications in the management of patients with prostate cancer (PCa). Herein, we report on patterns and frequency of pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline variants (P/LPGVs) among newly diagnosed Arab patients with PCa.

Methods

Patients meeting the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) eligibility criteria for GGT were offered a 19-gene PCa panel or an expanded 84-gene multi-cancer panel.

Results

During the study period, 231 patients were enrolled; 107 (46.3%) had metastatic disease at diagnosis. In total, 17 P/LPGVs were detected in 17 patients (7.4%). Among the 113 (48.9%) patients who underwent GGT with the 19-gene panel, eight (7.1%) had P/LPGVs, compared to nine (7.6%) of the 118 (51.1%) who did GGT through the expanded 84-gene panel (P = 0.88). Variant of uncertain significance (VUS) rate was higher (n = 73, 61.9%) among the group who underwent expanded 84-gene panel testing compared to those who underwent the 19-gene PCa panel (n = 35, 30.9%) (P = 0.001). P/LPGVs in DNA damage repair (DDR) genes, most frequently BRCA2, CHEK2 and TP53, were the most common P/LPGVs findings.

Conclusion

This study is the first to characterize the germline genetic profile of an Arab population with PCa. All detected P/LPGVs were potentially actionable, with most variants able to be detected with a PCa-specific panel.

Screening embryos for polygenic disease risk: a review of epidemiological, clinical, and ethical considerations

BACKGROUND

The genetic composition of embryos generated by in vitro fertilization (IVF) can be examined with preimplantation genetic testing (PGT). Until recently, PGT was limited to detecting single-gene, high-risk pathogenic variants, large structural variants, and aneuploidy. Recent advances have made genome-wide genotyping of IVF embryos feasible and affordable, raising the possibility of screening embryos for their risk of polygenic diseases such as breast cancer, hypertension, diabetes, or schizophrenia. Despite a heated debate around this new technology, called polygenic embryo screening (PES; also PGT-P), it is already available to IVF patients in some countries. Several articles have studied epidemiological, clinical, and ethical perspectives on PES; however, a comprehensive, principled review of this emerging field is missing.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

This review has four main goals. First, given the interdisciplinary nature of PES studies, we aim to provide a self-contained educational background about PES to reproductive specialists interested in the subject. Second, we provide a comprehensive and critical review of arguments for and against the introduction of PES, crystallizing and prioritizing the key issues. We also cover the attitudes of IVF patients, clinicians, and the public towards PES. Third, we distinguish between possible future groups of PES patients, highlighting the benefits and harms pertaining to each group. Finally, our review, which is supported by ESHRE, is intended to aid healthcare professionals and policymakers in decision-making regarding whether to introduce PES in the clinic, and if so, how, and to whom.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for PubMed-indexed articles published between 1/1/2003 and 1/3/2024 using the terms 'polygenic embryo screening', 'polygenic preimplantation', and 'PGT-P'. We limited the review to primary research papers in English whose main focus was PES for medical conditions. We also included papers that did not appear in the search but were deemed relevant.

OUTCOMES

The main theoretical benefit of PES is a reduction in lifetime polygenic disease risk for children born after screening. The magnitude of the risk reduction has been predicted based on statistical modelling, simulations, and sibling pair analyses. Results based on all methods suggest that under the best-case scenario, large relative risk reductions are possible for one or more diseases. However, as these models abstract several practical limitations, the realized benefits may be smaller, particularly due to a limited number of embryos and unclear future accuracy of the risk estimates. PES may negatively impact patients and their future children, as well as society. The main personal harms are an unindicated IVF treatment, a possible reduction in IVF success rates, and patient confusion, incomplete counselling, and choice overload. The main possible societal harms include discarded embryos, an increasing demand for 'designer babies', overemphasis of the genetic determinants of disease, unequal access, and lower utility in people of non-European ancestries. Benefits and harms will vary across the main potential patient groups, comprising patients already requiring IVF, fertile people with a history of a severe polygenic disease, and fertile healthy people. In the United States, the attitudes of IVF patients and the public towards PES seem positive, while healthcare professionals are cautious, sceptical about clinical utility, and concerned about patient counselling.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

The theoretical potential of PES to reduce risk across multiple polygenic diseases requires further research into its benefits and harms. Given the large number of practical limitations and possible harms, particularly unnecessary IVF treatments and discarded viable embryos, PES should be offered only within a research context before further clarity is achieved regarding its balance of benefits and harms. The gap in attitudes between healthcare professionals and the public needs to be narrowed by expanding public and patient education and providing resources for informative and unbiased genetic counselling.

Germline Variants of Uncertain Significance in Gynecologic Oncology Patients

Germline and somatic genetic/genomic testing are commonly ordered for gynecologic oncology patients. Genetic tests can inform disease etiology, prognosis, treatment decisions, and risk to the patient's relatives. Variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) are frequently encountered and have a more nuanced interpretation than straightforward pathogenic or benign variant classifications. Clinical care providers should be familiar with why and how VUSs are reported, their clinical significance, variant reclassification practices, and patient perceptions of VUSs.

Estimating cancer risk in carriers of Lynch syndrome variants in UK Biobank

BackgroundLynch syndrome (LS) is an inherited cancer predisposition syndrome caused by genetic variants affecting DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2 Cancer risk in LS is estimated from cohorts of individuals ascertained by individual or family history of cancer, which may upwardly bias estimates.

METHODS

830 carriers of pathogenic or likely pathogenic (path_MMR) MMR gene variants classified by InSiGHT were identified in 454 756 UK Biobank (UKB) participants using whole-exome sequence. Nelson-Aalen survival analysis was used to estimate cumulative incidence of colorectal, endometrial and breast cancer (BC).

RESULTS

Cumulative incidence of colorectal and endometrial cancer (EC) by age 70 years was elevated in path_MMR carriers compared with non-carriers (colorectal: 11.8% (95% confidence interval (CI): 9.5% to 14.6%) vs 1.7% (95% CI: 1.6% to 1.7%), endometrial: 13.4% (95% CI: 10.2% to 17.6%) vs 1.0% (95% CI: 0.9% to 1.0%)), but the magnitude of this increase differed between genes. Cumulative BC incidence by age 70 years was not elevated in path_MMR carriers compared with non-carriers (8.9% (95% CI: 6.3% to 12.4%) vs 7.5% (95% CI: 7.4% to 7.6%)). Cumulative cancer incidence estimates in UKB were similar to estimates from the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database for all genes and cancers, except there was no evidence for elevated EC risk in carriers of pathogenic PMS2 variants in UKB.

CONCLUSION

These results support offering incidentally identified carriers of any path_MMR surveillance to manage colorectal cancer risk. Incidentally identified carriers of pathogenic variants in MLH1, MSH2 and MSH6 would also benefit from interventions to reduce EC risk. The results suggest that BC is not an LS-related cancer.

Preconception carrier screening and preimplantation genetic testing in the infertility management

BACKGROUND

Genetic testing serves as a valuable element of reproductive care, applicable at various stages of the reproductive journey: (i) before pregnancy, when a couple's genetic reproductive risk can be evaluated; (ii) before embryo implantation, as part of in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment, to ascertain several inherited or de novo genetic/chromosomal diseases of the embryo before transfer; (iii) during the prenatal period, to assess the genetic costitution of the fetus. Preconception carrier screening (CS) is a genetic test typically performed on couples planning a pregnancy. The primary purpose of CS is to identify couples at-risk of conceiving a child affected by a severe genetic disorder with autosomal recessive or X-linked inheritance. Detection of high reproductive risk through CS allows prospective parents to be informed of their predisposition and improve reproductive decision-making. These include undergoing IVF with preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) or donor gametes, prenatal diagnosis, adoption, remaining childless, taking no actions. Both the presence of the affected gene (PGT-M) and chromosomal status (PGT-A) of the embryo can be comprehensively assessed through modern approaches.

OBJECTIVES

We provide a review of CS and PGT applications to equip healthcare providers with up-to-date information regarding their opportunities and complexities.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The use of CS and PGT is currently considered the most effective intervention for avoiding both an affected pregnancy whilst using autologous gametes in couples with known increased risk, and chromosomal abnormalities. As our understanding in the genetic component in pathological conditions increases, the number of tested disorders will expand, offering a more thorough assessment of one's genetic inheritance. Nevertheless, implementation and development in this field must be accompanied by scientific and ethical considerations to ensure this approach serves the best long-term interests of individuals and society, promoting justice and autonomy and preserving parenthood and the healthcare system.

CONCLUSION

The combination of CS and PGT aligns with principles of personalized medicine by offering reproductive care tailored to the individual's genetic makeup.

Understanding variants of unknown significance and classification of genomic alterations

Despite recent efforts to issue clinical guidelines outlining strategies to define the pathogenicity of genomic variants, there is currently no standardized framework for which to make these assertions. This review does not present a step-by-step methodology, but rather takes a holistic approach to discuss many aspects which should be taken into consideration when determining variant pathogenicity. Categorization should be curated to reflect relevant findings within the scope of the specific medical context. Functional characterization should evaluate all available information, including results from literature reviews, different classes of genomic data repositories, and applicable computational predictive algorithms. This article further proposes a multidimensional view to infer pathogenic status from many genomic measurements across multiple axes. Notably, tumor suppressors and oncogenes exhibit fundamentally different biology which helps refine the importance of effects on splicing, mutation interactions, copy number thresholds, rearrangement annotations, germline status, and genome-wide signatures. Understanding these relevant datapoints with thoughtful perspective could aid in the reclassification of variants of unknown significance (VUS), which are ambiguously understood and currently have uncertain clinical implications. Ongoing assessments of VUS examining these relevant biological axes could lead to more accurate classification of variant pathogenicity interpretation in diagnostic oncology.

Variants of uncertain significance in precision oncology: nuance or nuisance?

Variants of unknown significance cause uncertainty for patients and are a challenge for oncologists. This commentary describes 4 clinical examples illustrating these challenges.

Pedigree analysis exploring the inconsistency between diverse phenotypes and testing criteria for germline TP53 mutations in Chinese women with breast cancer

PURPOSE

In the present study, we addressed the inconsistency between the testing criteria and diverse phenotypes for germline TP53 mutation in patients with breast cancer in the Chinese population.

METHOD

We proposed a new added item (synchronous or metachronous bilateral breast cancer) as one of the testing criteria (aimed at high-penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes) and applied it for determining TP53 germline mutation status in 420 female patients with breast cancer using multigene panel-based next-generation sequencing, Sanger sequencing, and mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

We found that 1.4% of patients carried a pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline TP53 mutation. Compared with BRCA mutation carriers (8.0%) and non-carriers (7.1%), TP53 mutation carriers (33.3%) developed breast cancer earlier. The majority of TP53 mutation carriers (66.7%) developed breast cancer after age 30 and had bilateral breast cancer (33.3%). Pedigree investigation of four TP53 carriers and a patient with a TP53 variant of unknown significance revealed that neither of their parents harbored the same mutations as the probands, indicating that the mutations might occur de novo.

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed distinguishing features of TP53 carriers among Chinese women with breast cancer, which is inconsistent with the currently used testing criteria; therefore, the newly proposed testing criteria may be more appropriate.

The Role of Genetic Testing in Adult CKD

Mounting evidence indicates that monogenic disorders are the underlying cause in a significant proportion of patients with CKD. In recent years, the diagnostic yield of genetic testing in these patients has increased significantly as a result of revolutionary developments in genetic sequencing techniques and sequencing data analysis. Identification of disease-causing genetic variant(s) in patients with CKD may facilitate prognostication and personalized management, including nephroprotection and decisions around kidney transplantation, and is crucial for genetic counseling and reproductive family planning. A genetic diagnosis in a patient with CKD allows for screening of at-risk family members, which is also important for determining their eligibility as kidney transplant donors. Despite evidence for clinical utility, increased availability, and data supporting the cost-effectiveness of genetic testing in CKD, especially when applied early in the diagnostic process, many nephrologists do not use genetic testing to its full potential because of multiple perceived barriers. Our aim in this article was to empower nephrologists to (further) implement genetic testing as a diagnostic means in their clinical practice, on the basis of the most recent insights and exemplified by patient vignettes. We stress why genetic testing is of significant clinical benefit to many patients with CKD, provide recommendations for which patients to test and which test(s) to order, give guidance about interpretation of genetic testing results, and highlight the necessity for and essential components of pretest and post-test genetic counseling.

Selection of Germline Genetic Testing Panels in Patients With Cancer: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To guide use of multigene panels for germline genetic testing for patients with cancer.

METHODS

An ASCO Expert Panel convened to develop recommendations on the basis of a systematic review of guidelines, consensus statements, and studies of germline and somatic genetic testing.

RESULTS

Fifty-two guidelines and consensus statements met eligibility criteria for the primary search; 14 studies were identified for Clinical Question 4.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Patients should have a family history taken and recorded that includes details of cancers in first- and second-degree relatives and the patient's ethnicity. When more than one gene is relevant based on personal and/or family history, multigene panel testing should be offered. When considering what genes to include in the panel, the minimal panel should include the more strongly recommended genes from Table 1 and may include those less strongly recommended. A broader panel may be ordered when the potential benefits are clearly identified, and the potential harms from uncertain results should be mitigated. Patients who meet criteria for germline genetic testing should be offered germline testing regardless of results from tumor testing. Patients who would not normally be offered germline genetic testing based on personal and/or family history criteria but who have a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant identified by tumor testing in a gene listed in Table 2 under the outlined circumstances should be offered germline testing.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/molecular-testing-and-biomarkers-guidelines.

Variant classification changes over time in the clinical molecular diagnostic laboratory setting

BACKGROUND

Variant classification in the setting of germline genetic testing is necessary for patients and their families to receive proper care. Variants are classified as pathogenic (P), likely pathogenic (LP), uncertain significance (VUS), likely benign (LB) and benign (B) using the standards and guidelines recommended by the American College of Medical Genetics and the Association for Molecular Pathology, with modifications for specific genes. As the literature continues to rapidly expand, and evidence continues to accumulate, prior classifications can be updated accordingly. In this study, we aim to characterise variant reclassifications in Ontario.

METHODS

DNA samples from patients seen at hereditary cancer clinics in Ontario from January 2012 to April 2022 were submitted for testing. Patients met provincial eligibility criteria for testing for hereditary cancer syndromes or polycystic kidney disease. Reclassification events were determined to be within their broader category of significance (B to LB or vice versa, or P to LP or vice versa) or outside of their broader category as significance (ie, significant reclassifications from B/LB or VUS or P/LP, from P/LP to VUS or B/LB, or from VUS to any other category).

RESULTS

Of the 8075 unique variants included in this study, 23.7% (1912) of variants were reassessed, and 7.2% (578) of variants were reclassified. Of these, 351 (60.7%) variants were reclassified outside of their broader category of significance. Overall, the final classification was significantly different for 336 (58.1%) variants. Importantly, most reclassified variants were downgraded to a more benign classification (n=245; 72.9%). Of note, most reclassified VUS was downgraded to B/LB (n=233; 84.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The likelihood for reclassification of variants on reassessment is high. Most reclassified variants were downgraded to a more benign classification. Our findings highlight the importance of periodic variant reassessment to ensure timely and appropriate care for patients and their families.

Advancing Genetic Testing in Kidney Diseases: Report From a National Kidney Foundation Working Group

About 37 million people in the United States have chronic kidney disease, a disease that encompasses multiple causes. About 10% or more of kidney diseases in adults and as many as 70% of selected chronic kidney diseases in children are expected to be explained by genetic causes. Despite the advances in genetic testing and an increasing understanding of the genetic bases of certain kidney diseases, genetic testing in nephrology lags behind other medical fields. More understanding of the benefits and logistics of genetic testing is needed to advance the implementation of genetic testing in chronic kidney diseases. Accordingly, the National Kidney Foundation convened a Working Group of experts with diverse expertise in genetics, nephrology, and allied fields to develop recommendations for genetic testing for monogenic disorders and to identify genetic risk factors for oligogenic and polygenic causes of kidney diseases. Algorithms for clinical decision making on genetic testing and a road map for advancing genetic testing in kidney diseases were generated. An important aspect of this initiative was the use of a modified Delphi process to reach group consensus on the recommendations. The recommendations and resources described herein provide support to nephrologists and allied health professionals to advance the use of genetic testing for diagnosis and screening of kidney diseases.

The 5-WS of targeting DNA-damage repair (DDR) pathways in prostate cancer

DNA-damage repair (DDR) pathways alterations, a growing area of interest in oncology, are detected in about 20% of patient with prostate cancer and are associated with improved sensitivity to poly(ADP ribose) polymerases (PARP) inhibitors. In May 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved two PARP inhibitors (olaparib and rucaparib) for prostate cancer treatment. Moreover, germline aberrations in DDR pathways genes have also been related to familial or hereditary prostate cancer, requiring tailored health-care programs. These emerging scenarios are rapidly changing diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic approaches in prostate cancer management. The aim of this review is to highlight the five W-points of DDR pathways in prostate cancer: why targeting DDR pathways in prostate cancer; what we should test for genomic profiling in prostate cancer; "where" testing genetic assessment in prostate cancer (germline or somatic, solid or liquid biopsy); when genetic testing is appropriate in prostate cancer; who could get benefit from PARP inhibitors; how improve patients outcome with combinations strategies.

The Development and Evaluation of Novel Patient Educational Material for a Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) Result in Hereditary Cancer Genes

A Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) is a difference in the DNA sequence with uncertain consequences for gene function. A VUS in a hereditary cancer gene should not change medical care, yet some patients undergo medical procedures based on their VUS result, highlighting the unmet educational needs among patients and healthcare providers. To address this need, we developed, evaluated, and refined novel educational materials to explain that while VUS results do not change medical care, it remains important to share any personal or family history of cancer with family members given that their personal and family medical history can guide their cancer risk management. We began by reviewing the prior literature and transcripts from interviews with six individuals with a VUS result to identify content and design considerations to incorporate into educational materials. We then gathered feedback to improve materials via a focus group of multidisciplinary experts and multiple rounds of semi-structured interviews with individuals with a VUS result. Themes for how to improve content, visuals, and usefulness were used to refine the materials. In the final round of interviews with an additional 10 individuals with a VUS result, materials were described as relatable, useful, factual, and easy to navigate, and also increased their understanding of cancer gene VUS results.

Incidental pathogenic germline alterations detected through liquid biopsy in patients with solid tumors: prevalence, clinical utility and implications

Liquid biopsy, a minimally invasive approach for detecting tumor biomarkers in blood, has emerged as a leading-edge technique in cancer precision medicine. New evidence has shown that liquid biopsies can incidentally detect pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) associated with cancer predisposition, including in patients with a cancer for which genetic testing is not recommended. The ability to detect these incidental PGV in cancer patients through liquid biopsy raises important questions regarding the management of this information and its clinical implications. This incidental identification of PGVs raises concerns about cancer predisposition and the potential impact on patient management, not only in terms of providing access to treatment based on the tumor molecular profiling, but also the management of revealing genetic predisposition in patients and families. Understanding how to interpret this information is essential to ensure proper decision-making and to optimize cancer treatment and prevention strategies. In this review we provide a comprehensive summary of current evidence of incidental PGVs in cancer predisposition genes identified by liquid biopsy in patients with cancer. We critically review the methodological considerations of liquid biopsy as a tool for germline diagnosis, clinical utility and potential implications for cancer prevention, treatment, and research.

Reclassification of Variants Following Renal Genetics Testing: Uncommon Yet Impactful for Diagnosis and Management

Introduction

Genetic testing is increasingly utilized in nephrology practice, but limited real-world data exist on variant reclassification following renal genetics testing.

Methods

A cohort of patients at the Cleveland Clinic Renal Genetics Clinic who underwent genetic testing through clinical laboratories was assessed with their clinical and laboratory data analyzed.

Results

Between January 2019 and June 2023, 425 new patients with variable kidney disorders from 413 pedigrees completed genetic testing through 10 clinical laboratories, including 255 (60%) females with median (25th, 75th percentiles) age of 36 (22-54) years. Multigene panel was the most frequently used modality followed by single-gene testing, exome sequencing (ES), chromosomal microarray (CMA), and genome sequencing (GS). At initial report, 52% of patients had ≥1 variants of uncertain significance (VUS) with or without concurrent pathogenic variant(s). Twenty amendments were issued across 19 pedigrees involving 19 variants in 17 genes. The overall variant reclassification rate was 5%, with 63% being upgrades and 32% downgrades. Of the reclassified variants, 79% were initially reported as VUS. The median time-to-amendments from initial reports was 8.4 (4-27) months. Following the variant reclassifications, 60% of the patients received a new diagnosis or a change in diagnosis. Among these, 67% of patients received significant changes in clinical management.

Conclusion

Variant reclassification following genetic testing is infrequent but important for diagnosis and management of patients with suspected genetic kidney disease. The majority of variant reclassifications involve VUS and are upgrades in clinically issued amended reports. Further studies are needed to investigate the predictors of such events.

The importance of variant reinterpretation in inherited cardiovascular diseases: Establishing the optimal timeframe

Inherited cardiovascular diseases are rare diseases that are difficult to diagnose by non-expert professionals. Genetic analyses play a key role in the diagnosis of these diseases, in which the identification of a pathogenic genetic variant is often a diagnostic criterion. Therefore, genetic variant classification and routine reinterpretation as data become available represent one of the main challenges associated with genetic analyses. Using the genetic variants identified in an inherited cardiovascular diseases unit during a 10-year period, the objectives of this study were: 1) to evaluate the impact of genetic variant reinterpretation, 2) to compare the reclassification rates between different cohorts of cardiac channelopathies and cardiomyopathies, and 3) to establish the most appropriate periodicity for genetic variant reinterpretation. All the evaluated cohorts (full cohort of inherited cardiovascular diseases, cardiomyopathies, cardiac channelopathies, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, dilated cardiomyopathy, arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy, Brugada syndrome, long QT syndrome and catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia) showed reclassification rates above 25%, showing even higher reclassification rates when there is definitive evidence of the association between the gene and the disease in the cardiac channelopathies. Evaluation of genetic variant reclassification rates based on the year of the initial classification showed that the most appropriate frequency for the reinterpretation would be 2 years, with the possibility of a more frequent reinterpretation if deemed convenient. To keep genetic variant classifications up to date, genetic counsellors play a critical role in the reinterpretation process, providing clinical evidence that genetic diagnostic laboratories often do not have at their disposal and communicating changes in classification and the potential implications of these reclassifications to patients and relatives.

Clonal origin and genomic diversity in Lynch syndrome-associated endometrial cancer with multiple synchronous tumors: Identification of the pathogenicity of MLH1 p.L582H

Lynch syndrome-associated endometrial cancer patients often present multiple synchronous tumors and this assessment can affect treatment strategies. We present a case of a 27-year-old woman with tumors in the uterine corpus, cervix, and ovaries who was diagnosed with endometrial cancer and exhibited cervical invasion and ovarian metastasis. Her family history suggested Lynch syndrome, and genetic testing identified a variant of uncertain significance, MLH1 p.L582H. We conducted immunohistochemical staining, microsatellite instability analysis, and Sanger sequencing for Lynch syndrome-associated cancers in three generations of the family and identified consistent MLH1 loss. Whole-exome sequencing for the corpus, cervical, and ovarian tumors of the proband identified a copy-neutral loss of heterozygosity (LOH) occurring at the MLH1 position in all tumors. This indicated that the germline variant and the copy-neutral LOH led to biallelic loss of MLH1 and was the cause of cancer initiation. All tumors shared a portion of somatic mutations with high mutant allele frequencies, suggesting a common clonal origin. There were no mutations shared only between the cervix and ovary samples. The profiles of mutant allele frequencies shared between the corpus and cervix or ovary indicated that two different subclones originating from the corpus independently metastasized to the cervix or ovary. Additionally, all tumors presented unique mutations in endometrial cancer-associated genes such as ARID1A and PIK3CA. In conclusion, we demonstrated clonal origin and genomic diversity in a Lynch syndrome-associated endometrial cancer, suggesting the importance of evaluating multiple sites in Lynch syndrome patients with synchronous tumors.

Slice Testing-Considerations from Ordering to Reporting: A Joint Report of the Association for Molecular Pathology, College of American Pathologists, and National Society of Genetic Counselors

As the number of genes associated with various germline disorders continues to grow, it is becoming more difficult for clinical laboratories to maintain separate assays for interrogating disease-focused gene panels. One solution to this challenge is termed slice testing, where capture backbone is used to analyze data specific to a set of genes, and for this article, we will focus on exome. A key advantage to this strategy is greater flexibility by adding genes as they become associated with disease or the ability to accommodate specific provider requests. Here, we provide expert consensus recommendations and results from an Association for Molecular Pathology-sponsored survey of clinical laboratories performing exome sequencing to compare a slice testing approach with traditional static gene panels and comprehensive exome analysis. We explore specific considerations for slices, including gene selection, analytic performance, coverage, quality, and interpretation. Our goal is to provide comprehensive guidance for clinical laboratories interested in designing and using slice tests as a diagnostic.

Variant reclassification and clinical implications

Genomic technologies have transformed clinical genetic testing, underlining the importance of accurate molecular genetic diagnoses. Variant classification, ranging from benign to pathogenic, is fundamental to these tests. However, variant reclassification, the process of reassigning the pathogenicity of variants over time, poses challenges to diagnostic legitimacy. This review explores the medical and scientific literature available on variant reclassification, focusing on its clinical implications.Variant reclassification is driven by accruing evidence from diverse sources, leading to variant reclassification frequency ranging from 3.6% to 58.8%. Recent studies have shown that significant changes can occur when reviewing variant classifications within 1 year after initial classification, illustrating the importance of early, accurate variant assignation for clinical care.Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) are particularly problematic. They lack clear categorisation but have influenced patient treatment despite recommendations against it. Addressing VUS reclassification is essential to enhance the credibility of genetic testing and the clinical impact. Factors affecting reclassification include standardised guidelines, clinical phenotype-genotype correlations through deep phenotyping and ancestry studies, large-scale databases and bioinformatics tools. As genomic databases grow and knowledge advances, reclassification rates are expected to change, reducing discordance in future classifications.Variant reclassification affects patient diagnosis, precision therapy and family screening. The exact patient impact is yet unknown. Understanding influencing factors and adopting standardised guidelines are vital for precise molecular genetic diagnoses, ensuring optimal patient care and minimising clinical risk.

Genomic disparity impacts variant classification of cancer susceptibility genes in Turkish breast cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

Turkish genome is underrepresented in large genomic databases. This study aims to evaluate the effect of allele frequency in the Turkish population in determining the clinical utility of germline findings in breast cancer, including invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), mixed invasive ductal and lobular carcinoma (IDC-L), and ductal carcinoma (DC).

METHODS

Two clinic-based cohorts from the Umraniye Research and Training Hospital (URTH) were used in this study: a cohort consisting of 132 women with breast cancer and a non-cancer cohort consisting of 492 participants. The evaluation of the germline landscape was performed by analysis of 27 cancer genes. The frequency and type of variants in the breast cancer cohort were compared to those in the non-cancer cohort to investigate the effect of population genetics. The variant allele frequencies in Turkish Variome and gnomAD were statistically evaluated.

RESULTS

The genetic analysis identified 121 variants in the breast cancer cohort (actionable = 32, VUS = 89) and 223 variants in the non-cancer cohort (actionable = 25, VUS = 188). The occurrence of 21 variants in both suggested a possible genetic population effect. Evaluation of allele frequency of 121 variants from the breast cancer cohort showed 22% had a significantly higher value in Turkish Variome compared to gnomAD (p < 0.0001, 95% CI) with a mean difference of 60 times (ranging from 1.37-354.4). After adjusting for variant allele frequency using the ancestry-appropriate database, 6.7% (5/75) of VUS was reclassified to likely benign.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study of population genetic effects in breast cancer subtypes in Turkish women. Our findings underscore the need for a large genomic database representing Turkish population-specific variants. It further highlights the significance of the ancestry-appropriate population database for accurate variant assessment in clinical settings.

Unraveling Complexities in Genetically Elusive Long QT Syndrome

Genetic testing has become standard of care for patients with long QT syndrome (LQTS), providing diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic information for both probands and their family members. However, up to a quarter of patients with LQTS do not have identifiable Mendelian pathogenic variants in the currently known LQTS-associated genes. This absence of genetic confirmation, intriguingly, does not lessen the severity of LQTS, with the prognosis in these gene-elusive patients with unequivocal LQTS mirroring genotype-positive patients in the limited data available. Such a conundrum instigates an exploration into the causes of corrected QT interval (QTc) prolongation in these cases, unveiling a broad spectrum of potential scenarios and mechanisms. These include multiple environmental influences on QTc prolongation, exercise-induced repolarization abnormalities, and the profound implications of the constantly evolving nature of genetic testing and variant interpretation. In addition, the rapid advances in genetics have the potential to uncover new causal genes, and polygenic risk factors may aid in the diagnosis of high-risk patients. Navigating this multifaceted landscape requires a systematic approach and expert knowledge, integrating the dynamic nature of genetics and patient-specific influences for accurate diagnosis, management, and counseling of patients. The role of a subspecialized expert cardiogenetic clinic is paramount in evaluation to navigate this complexity. Amid these intricate aspects, this review outlines potential causes of gene-elusive LQTS. It also provides an outline for the evaluation of patients with negative and inconclusive genetic test results and underscores the need for ongoing adaptation and reassessment in our understanding of LQTS, as the complexities of gene-elusive LQTS are increasingly deciphered.

Beyond BRCA: Diagnosis and management of homologous recombination repair deficient pancreatic cancer

Approximately 4%-7% of patients diagnosed with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are found to harbor deleterious germline mutations in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2. Loss of function of BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 results in deficiency in homologous recombination repair (HRR), a critical DNA repair pathway, and confers sensitivity to certain DNA damaging agents, including platinum chemotherapy and PARP inhibitors. The PARP inhibitor olaparib is food and drug administration (FDA) approved for use in pancreatic cancer based on the POLO trial, which found that maintenance olaparib significantly prolonged progression free survival compared to placebo among patients with germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and metastatic PDAC that had not progressed following frontline platinum-based chemotherapy. Recently, there has been considerable interest in identifying patients without BRCA inactivation whose tumors also exhibit properties of HRR deficiency and thus may be susceptible to therapies with proven benefit in cancers harboring BRCA mutations. Here, we discuss methods for identification of HRR-deficiency and review the management of HRR-deficient cancers with a focus on HRR-deficient PDAC.

Genetic testing in adults with neurologic disorders: indications, approach, and clinical impacts

The role of genetic testing in neurologic clinical practice has increased dramatically in recent years, driven by research on genetic causes of neurologic disease and increased availability of genetic sequencing technology. Genetic testing is now indicated for adults with a wide range of common neurologic conditions. The potential clinical impacts of a genetic diagnosis are also rapidly expanding, with a growing list of gene-specific treatments and clinical trials, in addition to important implications for prognosis, surveillance, family planning, and diagnostic closure. The goals of this review are to provide practical guidance for clinicians about the role of genetics in their practice and to provide the neuroscience research community with a broad survey of current progress in this field. We aim to answer three questions for the neurologist in practice: Which of my patients need genetic testing? What testing should I order? And how will genetic testing help my patient? We focus on common neurologic disorders and presentations to the neurology clinic. For each condition, we review the most current guidelines and evidence regarding indications for genetic testing, expected diagnostic yield, and recommended testing approach. We also focus on clinical impacts of genetic diagnoses, highlighting a number of gene-specific therapies recently approved for clinical use, and a rapidly expanding landscape of gene-specific clinical trials, many using novel nucleotide-based therapeutic modalities like antisense oligonucleotides and gene transfer. We anticipate that more widespread use of genetic testing will help advance therapeutic development and improve the care, and outcomes, of patients with neurologic conditions.

Underrepresentation of Diverse Ancestries Drives Uncertainty in Genetic Variants Found in Cardiomyopathy-Associated Genes

BACKGROUND

Thousands of genetic variants have been identified in cardiomyopathy-associated genes. Diagnostic genetic testing is key for evaluation of individuals with suspected cardiomyopathy. While accurate variant pathogenicity assignment is important for diagnosis, the frequency of and factors associated with clinically relevant assessment changes are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The authors aimed to characterize pathogenicity assignment change in cardiomyopathy-associated genes and to identify factors associated with this change.

METHODS

We identified 10 sarcomeric and 6 desmosomal genetic cardiomyopathy-associated genes along with comparison gene sets. We analyzed clinically meaningful changes in pathogenicity assignment between any of the following: pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP), conflicting interpretations of pathogenicity or variant of unknown significance (C/VUS), and benign/likely benign. We explored association of minor allele frequency (MAF) differences between well, and traditionally poorly, represented ancestries in genetic studies with assessment stability. Analyses were performed using ClinVar and GnomAD data.

RESULTS

Of the 30,975 cardiomyopathy-associated gene variants in ClinVar, 2,276 of them (7.3%) had a clinically meaningful change in pathogenicity assignment over the study period, 2011 to 2021. Sixty-seven percent of variants that underwent a clinically significant change moved from P/LP or benign/likely benign to C/VUS. Among cardiomyopathy variants downgraded from P/LP, 35% had a MAF above 1 × 10 -4 in non-Europeans and below 1 × 10 -4 in Europeans.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past 10 years, 7.3% of cardiomyopathy gene variants underwent a clinically meaningful change in pathogenicity assignment. Over 30% of downgrades from P/LP may be attributable to higher MAF in Non-Europeans than Europeans. This finding suggests that low ancestral diversity in genetic studies has increased diagnostic uncertainty in cardiomyopathy gene variants.

Release of reclassified VUS results of now deceased patients to family members: Practices and opinions

Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) are commonly identified in genetic testing. The rate at which a VUS is reclassified depends on multiple factors. However, as the amount of time it might take for a VUS to be reclassified varies, some patients with a VUS genetic testing result might have passed away before the VUS is reclassified. A VUS that is reclassified after the patient's death has clinical implications for the deceased patient's family members. The disclosure of reclassified VUS results for a deceased patient has complex legal and ethical implications. There are no established guidelines on how the reclassified VUS result for a deceased patient should be disclosed to at-risk relatives. An online survey was sent to members of the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGCs) to elicit practices and opinions regarding this issue. A total of 153 (4%) NSGC members completed the survey. Thirty-seven (24.2%) respondents reported having received a reclassified VUS for a deceased patient. Respondents were more likely to attempt disclosure if the variant was reclassified as pathogenic (93.5%) versus benign (76.5%), although the difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.06). Respondents more often reported the impact on family members (85.5%) than the decedent's right to privacy (15.0%) as extremely important when considering disclosure to family members. A legal mechanism to allow disclosure to relatives was supported by 70.6% of respondents and 97.4% felt the issue was important enough to pursue if such a process was in place. Only 9.8% of respondents supported a legal requirement of consent before disclosing to family members when a VUS is reclassified after the patient has passed away. Our results indicate that there is no consensus for how these results should be handled and a mechanism for disclosure of reclassified results to family members is supported.

Experience of reassessing FBN1 variants of uncertain significance by gene-specific guidelines

BACKGROUND

Despite the 2015 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and Association of Molecular Pathology (AMP) guideline, many variants of FBN1 gene remain inconclusive. In line with publication of the FBN1-specific variant interpretation guideline by ClinGen in 2022, we reassessed variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in FBN1 gene found in our institution.

METHODS

VUS found in the course of FBN1 sequencing between December 2015 and April 2022 were reassessed based on FBN1-specific variant interpretation guideline, review of updated literatures and additional genetic tests including family study and/or RNA study if available.

RESULTS

Out of 695 patients who underwent FBN1 sequencing, 61 VUS were found in 69 patients. Among them, 38 VUS in 43 patients (62.3%) were reclassified as pathogenic and likely pathogenic variant ((L)PV), including 20 novel (L)PV. Major causes of reclassification were: (1) gene-specific modification of ACMG/AMP criteria, (2) updated literatures and (3) additional genetic tests. The most important evidence for reclassification was clarification of critical amino acid residues.

CONCLUSIONS

After reassessing FBN1 variants according to FBN1-specific guideline and up-to-date database, a significant number of VUS was reclassified. Clinical laboratories are encouraged to perform variant reassessment at regular intervals or when there is a major change in the principle of variant interpretation.

Genetic Testing in Metastatic Breast Cancer in the USA: A Podcast

This podcast highlights the importance of genetic testing in patients with metastatic breast cancer, with a specific focus on germline or inherited breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutations. In the USA, national guidelines recommend that all patients with recurrent or metastatic breast cancer should be offered genetic testing for germline breast cancer susceptibility gene 1 or 2 (BRCA1 or 2) mutations to identify patients potentially suitable for treatment with a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor. However, a retrospective study indicated that only 43% of patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer who may be eligible for genetic testing have undergone germline BRCA1 or 2 testing. Therefore, a large national effort is required to offer genetic testing to more patients with recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. The aim of this podcast is to provide physicians with information to support the early engagement of patients in discussions about genetic testing, and guidance on how to manage patient concerns about the potential implications of testing. Here, a healthcare professional discusses germline genetic testing with a patient advocate and answers questions regarding the importance of testing in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Furthermore, the authors discuss what it means to receive a positive or negative result for a germline BRCA mutation and the impact this may have on the patient and their family members. Overall, the authors emphasize the importance of healthcare professionals providing every patient with metastatic breast cancer with the relevant information about genetic testing so that patients can make informed decisions. Podcast Audio and Infographic available for this article.Podcast Audio and Infographic available for this article.

Exome Sequencing Reveals Novel Germline Variants in Breast Cancer Patients in the Southernmost Region of Thailand

Germline carriers of pathogenic variants in cancer susceptibility genes are at an increased risk of breast cancer (BC). We characterized germline variants in a cohort of 151 patients diagnosed with epithelial BC in the southernmost region of Thailand, where the predominant ethnicity differs from that of the rest of the country. Whole exome sequencing was used to identify and subsequently filter variants present in 26 genes known to be associated with cancer predisposition. Of the 151 individuals assessed, 23, corresponding to 15.2% of the sample, exhibited the presence of one or more pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants associated with BC susceptibility. We identified novel germline truncating variants in BRIP1, CHEK2, MSH6, PALB2, and PTEN and annotated variants of uncertain significance (VUSs), both novel and previously documented. Therefore, it is advisable to use genetic testing as an additional risk screening method for BC in this area.

Combining clinical and molecular characterization of CDH1: a multidisciplinary approach to reclassification of a splicing variant

Pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) in the CDH1 gene are associated with diffuse gastric and lobular breast cancer syndrome (DGLBC) and can increase the lifetime risk for both diffuse gastric cancer and lobular breast cancer. Given the risk for diffuse gastric cancer among individuals with CDH1 PGVs is up to 30-40%, prophylactic total gastrectomy is often recommended to affected individuals. Therefore, accurate interpretation of CDH1 variants is of the utmost importance for proper clinical decision-making. Herein we present a 45-year-old female, with lobular breast cancer and a father with gastric cancer of unknown pathology at age 48, who was identified to have an intronic variant of uncertain significance in the CDH1 gene, specifically c.833-9 C > G. Although the proband did not meet the International Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium (IGCLC) criteria for gastric surveillance, she elected to pursue an upper endoscopy where non-targeted gastric biopsies identified a focus of signet ring cell carcinoma (SRCC). The proband then underwent a total gastrectomy, revealing numerous SRCC foci, but no invasive diffuse gastric cancer. Simultaneously, a genetic testing laboratory performed RNA sequencing to further analyze the CDH1 intronic variant, identifying an abnormal transcript from a novel acceptor splice site. The RNA analysis in conjunction with the patient's gastric foci of SRCC and family history was sufficient evidence for reclassification of the variant from uncertain significance to likely pathogenic. In conclusion, we report the first case of the CDH1 c.833-9 C > G intronic variant being associated with DGLBC and illustrate how collaboration among clinicians, laboratory personnel, and patients is crucial for variant resolution.

Efficacy of National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines in Identifying Pathogenic Germline Variants Among Unselected Patients with Prostate Cancer: The PROCLAIM Trial

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PCa) patients with pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) in cancer predisposition genes may be eligible for U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved targeted therapies, clinical trials, or enhanced screening. Studies suggest that eligible patients are missing genetics-informed care due to restrictive testing criteria.

OBJECTIVE

To establish the prevalence of actionable PGVs among prospectively accrued, unselected PCa patients, stratified by their guideline eligibility.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Consecutive, unselected PCa patients were enrolled at 15 sites in the USA from October 2019 to August 2021, and had multigene cancer panel testing.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Correlates between the prevalence of PGVs and clinician-reported demographic and clinical characteristics were examined.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Among 958 patients (median [quartiles] age at diagnosis 65 [60, 71] yr), 627 (65%) had low- or intermediate-risk disease (grade group 1, 2, or 3). A total of 77 PGVs in 17 genes were identified in 74 patients (7.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.2-9.6%). No significant difference was found in the prevalence of PGVs among patients who met the 2019 National Comprehensive Cancer Network Prostate criteria (8.8%, 43/486, 95% CI 6.6-12%) versus those who did not (6.6%, 31/472, 95% CI 4.6-9.2%; odds ratio 1.38, 95% CI 0.85-2.23), indicating that these criteria would miss 42% of patients (31/74, 95% CI 31-53%) with PGVs. The criteria were less effective at predicting PGVs in patients from under-represented populations. Most PGVs (81%, 60/74) were potentially clinically actionable. Limitations include the inability to stratify analyses based on individual ethnicity due to low numbers of non-White patients with PGVs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that almost half of PCa patients with PGVs are missed by current testing guidelines. Comprehensive germline genetic testing should be offered to all patients with PCa.

PATIENT SUMMARY

One in 13 patients with prostate cancer carries an inherited variant that may be actionable for the patient's current care or prevention of future cancer, and could benefit from expanded testing criteria.

Understanding Trust Determinants in a Live Chat Service on Familial Cancer: Qualitative Triangulation Study With Focus Groups and Interviews in Germany

BACKGROUND

In dealing with familial cancer risk, seeking web-based health information can be a coping strategy for different stakeholder groups (ie, patients, relatives, and those suspecting an elevated familial cancer risk). In the vast digital landscape marked by a varied quality of web-based information and evolving technologies, trust emerges as a pivotal factor, guiding the process of health information seeking and interacting with digital health services. This trust formation in health information can be conceptualized as context dependent and multidimensional, involving 3 key dimensions: information seeker (trustor), information provider (trustee), and medium or platform (application). Owing to the rapid changes in the digital context, it is critical to understand how seekers form trust in new services, given the interplay among these different dimensions. An example of such a new service is a live chat operated by physicians for the general public with personalized cancer-related information and a focus on familial cancer risk.

OBJECTIVE

To gain a comprehensive picture of trust formation in a cancer-related live chat service, this study investigates the 3 dimensions of trust-trustor, trustee, and application-and their respective relevant characteristics based on a model of trust in web-based health information. In addition, the study aims to compare these characteristics across the 3 different stakeholder groups, with the goal to enhance the service's trustworthiness for each group.

METHODS

This qualitative study triangulated the different perspectives of medical cancer advisers, advisers from cancer support groups, and members of the public in interviews and focus group discussions to explore the 3 dimensions of trust-trustor, trustee, and application-and their determinants for a new live chat service for familial cancer risk to be implemented at the German Cancer Information Service.

RESULTS

The results indicate that experience with familial cancer risk is the key trustor characteristic to using, and trusting information provided by, the live chat service. The live chat might also be particularly valuable for people from minority groups who have unmet needs from physician-patient interactions. Participants highlighted trustee characteristics such as ability, benevolence, integrity, and humanness (ie, not a chatbot) as pivotal in a trustworthy cancer live chat service. Application-related characteristics, including the reputation of the institution, user-centric design, modern technology, and visual appeal, were also deemed essential. Despite the different backgrounds and sociodemographics of the 3 stakeholder groups, many overlaps were found among the 3 trust dimensions and their respective characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Trust in a live chat for cancer information is formed by different dimensions and characteristics of trust. This study underscores the importance of understanding trust formation in digital health services and suggests potential enhancements for effective, trustworthy interactions in live chat services (eg, by providing biographies of the human medical experts to differentiate them from artificial intelligence chatbots).

Risk-reducing surgery for individuals with cancer-predisposing germline pathogenic variants and no personal cancer history: a review of current UK guidelines

Identifying healthy carriers of germline pathogenic variants in high penetrance cancer susceptibility genes offers the potential for risk-reducing surgery. The NHS England National Genomic Test Directory offers germline and somatic testing to patients with certain cancers or rare and inherited diseases, or, in some cases, to their relatives. This review summarises current UK guidelines for risk-reducing surgical interventions available for individuals with no personal history of cancer, who are determined to carry germline pathogenic variants. An electronic literature search of NICE guidelines and PubMed citable articles was performed. NICE guidelines are available for bilateral mastectomy and are currently in development for risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Guidelines developed with affiliation to, or through relevant British Surgical Societies or international consensus, are available for risk-reducing hysterectomy, polypectomy, gastrectomy, and thyroidectomy. There is a disparity in the development and distribution of national guidelines for interventions amongst tumour types. Whilst we are focusing on UK guidelines, we anticipate they will be relevant much more generally and so of interest to a wider audience including where there are no national guidelines to refer to. We suggest that, as genetic testing becomes rapidly more accessible, guideline development for interventions should be more closely aligned to those for testing.

Landscape of germline pathogenic variants in patients with dual primary breast and lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Cancer predisposition is most often studied in the context of single cancers. However, inherited cancer predispositions can also give rise to multiple primary cancers. Yet, there is a paucity of studies on genetic predisposition in multiple primary cancers, especially those outside of well-defined cancer predisposition syndromes. This study aimed to identify germline variants associated with dual primary cancers of the breast and lung.

METHODS

Exome sequencing was performed on germline DNA from 55 Singapore patients (52 [95%] never-smokers) with dual primaries in the breast and lung, confirmed by histopathology. Using two large control cohorts: the local SG10K_Health (n = 9770) and gnomAD non-cancer East Asians (n = 9626); and two additional local case cohorts of early-onset or familial breast cancer (n = 290), and lung cancer (n = 209), variants were assessed for pathogenicity in accordance with ACMG/AMP guidelines. In particular, comparisons were made with known pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in the ClinVar database, pathogenicity predictions were obtained from in silico prediction software, and case-control association analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Altogether, we identified 19 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants from 16 genes, detected in 17 of 55 (31%) patients. Six of the 19 variants were identified using ClinVar, while 13 variants were classified pathogenic or likely pathogenic using ACMG/AMP guidelines. The 16 genes include well-known cancer predisposition genes such as BRCA2, TP53, and RAD51D; but also lesser known cancer genes EXT2, WWOX, GATA2, and GPC3. Most of these genes are involved in DNA damage repair, reaffirming the role of impaired DNA repair mechanisms in the development of multiple malignancies. These variants warrant further investigations in additional populations.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified both known and novel variants significantly enriched in patients with primary breast and lung malignancies, expanding the body of known cancer predisposition variants for both breast and lung cancer. These variants are mostly from genes involved in DNA repair, affirming the role of impaired DNA repair in the predisposition and development of multiple cancers.

Mutant SPART causes defects in mitochondrial protein import and bioenergetics reversed by Coenzyme Q

Pathogenic variants in SPART cause Troyer syndrome, characterized by lower extremity spasticity and weakness, short stature and cognitive impairment, and a severe mitochondrial impairment. Herein, we report the identification of a role of Spartin in nuclear-encoded mitochondrial proteins. SPART biallelic missense variants were detected in a 5-year-old boy with short stature, developmental delay and muscle weakness with impaired walking distance. Patient-derived fibroblasts showed an altered mitochondrial network, decreased mitochondrial respiration, increased mitochondrial reactive oxygen species and altered Ca2+ versus control cells. We investigated the mitochondrial import of nuclear-encoded proteins in these fibroblasts and in another cell model carrying a SPART loss-of-function mutation. In both cell models the mitochondrial import was impaired, leading to a significant decrease in different proteins, including two key enzymes involved in CoQ10 (CoQ) synthesis, COQ7 and COQ9, with a severe reduction in CoQ content, versus control cells. CoQ supplementation restored cellular ATP levels to the same extent shown by the re-expression of wild-type SPART, suggesting CoQ treatment as a promising therapeutic approach for patients carrying mutations in SPART.

Clinical implications of conflicting variant interpretations in the cancer genetics clinic

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to describe the clinical impact of commercial laboratories issuing conflicting classifications of genetic variants.

METHODS

Results from 2000 patients undergoing a multigene hereditary cancer panel by a single laboratory were analyzed. Clinically significant discrepancies between the laboratory-provided test reports and other major commercial laboratories were identified, including differences between pathogenic/likely pathogenic and variant of uncertain significance (VUS) classifications, via review of ClinVar archives. For patients carrying a VUS, clinical documentation was assessed for evidence of provider awareness of the conflict.

RESULTS

Fifty of 975 (5.1%) patients with non-negative results carried a variant with a clinically significant conflict, 19 with a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant reported in APC or MUTYH, and 31 with a VUS reported in CDKN2A, CHEK2, MLH1, MSH2, MUTYH, RAD51C, or TP53. Only 10 of 28 (36%) patients with a VUS with a clinically significant conflict had a documented discussion by a provider about the conflict. Discrepant counseling strategies were used for different patients with the same variant. Among patients with a CDKN2A variant or a monoallelic MUTYH variant, providers were significantly more likely to make recommendations based on the laboratory-reported classification.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the frequency of variant interpretation discrepancies and importance of clinician awareness. Guidance is needed on managing patients with discrepant variants to support accurate risk assessment.

Unveiling the genomic landscape of possible metastatic malignant transformation of teratoma secondary to cisplatin-chemotherapy: a Tempus gene analysis-based case report literature review

In this case report, we describe a patient who developed metastatic liver cancer of unknown primary origin one year following the surgical removal of a retroperitoneal adenocarcinoma. The retroperitoneal adenocarcinoma is considered a malignant transformation of teratoma (MTT), given the patient's distant history of testicular tumor excised 25 years prior and treated with chemotherapy. Despite no primary tumor being identified, the leading primary hypothesis is that the liver metastasis stemmed from the resected retroperitoneal adenocarcinoma from one year prior. We theorize that the patient's cisplatin-based chemotherapy 25 years ago may have triggered the MTT, as documented in the existing literature. Using TEMPUS gene testing on both the retroperitoneal adenocarcinoma and the recently discovered liver metastasis, we identified several genes with variants of unknown significance (VUS) that could potentially be linked to cisplatin chemotherapy resistance. While we cannot conclude that this patient definitively underwent MTT, it remains the most plausible explanation. Future research should investigate both the validity of the genes we have uncovered with respect to cisplatin resistance, as well as other genes associated with cisplatin resistance to further understand the pathogenesis of cisplatin resistance for better prediction of treatment response. As the world of medicine shifts towards individualized therapies and precision medicine, reporting and analyzing genetic mutations derived from tumors remains imperative. Our case report aims to contribute to the growing database of defined mutations and underscores the immense potential of genetic analysis in directing personalized treatment options.

Practices and Views of US Oncologists and Genetic Counselors Regarding Patient Recontact After Variant Reclassification: Results of a Nationwide Survey

PURPOSE

Over a 5-year or 10-year period, between 6% and 15% of germline cancer genetic variants undergo reclassification. Up-to-date interpretation can clarify a variant's clinical significance and guide patient management. As the frequency of reclassifications increase, the issue of whether, how, when, and which providers should recontact patients with information about reclassification becomes important. However, the field lacks research evidence and definitive guidance from professional organizations about how providers should recontact patients. We compared the perspectives of US oncologists and cancer genetic counselors (GCs) to describe their practices and views regarding recontact.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We developed a survey using themes identified from semistructured interviews with oncologists and GCs and administered it in a national sample of oncologists and GCs between July and September 2022.

RESULTS

In total, 634 respondents completed the survey including 349 oncologists and 285 GCs. On frequency of recontacting patients with reclassified results, 40% of GCs reported recontacting often compared with 12.5% of oncologists. Neither group reported recording patient preference for recontact on electronic medical record (EMR). Both groups agreed that all reclassified variants, even those that do not affect clinical management, should be returned to patients. They also reported that recontact via EMR messages, mailed letters, and phone calls from GC assistants were more suitable for downgrades. By contrast, face-to-face meetings and phone calls were preferred for upgrades. Remarkably, oncologists were more likely to endorse face-to-face return of results and were more likely to endorse return through a nongenetics provider compared to GCs.

CONCLUSION

These data on current recontact practices and opinions provide a foundation for developing guidelines with explicit recommendations on patient recontact that can help maximize clinical effect while considering provider preferences for recontact within resource-constrained genomic practice settings.

Practical considerations for reinterpretation of individual genetic variants

With the growing use of genetic testing in medicine, the question of when genetic findings should be reinterpreted in light of new data has become inescapable. The generation of population and disease-specific data, development of computational tools, and new understandings of the relationship of specific genes to disorders can all trigger changes in variant classification that may have important implications for patients and the clinicians caring for them. This is a particular concern for patients from groups underrepresented in current reference datasets, since they have higher rates of uncertain findings. Here we identify the challenges to implementing a systematic approach to variant reinterpretation and propose solutions. In particular, we address (a) the infrastructure needed to support implementation of systematic variant reinterpretation, (b) the issues around obtaining consent from patients for reinterpretation, (c) the process for triggering reinterpretation, (d) pathways for the flow of reinterpreted data, (e) considerations for how to cover the costs of reinterpretation, and (f) practical issues related to implementation of processes and policies that address these issues, including the importance of a fixed duration during which there is an expectation that variants will be reinterpreted.

Universal genetic testing for women with newly diagnosed breast cancer in the context of multidisciplinary team care

OBJECTIVE

To determine the feasibility of universal genetic testing of women with newly diagnosed breast cancer, to estimate the incidence of pathogenic gene variants and their impact on patient management, and to evaluate patient and clinician acceptance of universal testing.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

Prospective study of women with invasive or high grade in situ breast cancer and unknown germline status discussed at the Parkville Breast Service (Melbourne) multidisciplinary team meeting. Women were recruited to the pilot (12 June 2020 - 22 March 2021) and expansion phases (17 October 2021 - 8 November 2022) of the Mutational Assessment of newly diagnosed breast cancer using Germline and tumour genomICs (MAGIC) study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Germline testing by DNA sequencing, filtered for nineteen hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genes that could be classified as actionable; only pathogenic variants were reported. Surveys before and after genetic testing assessed pilot phase participants' perceptions of genetic testing, and psychological distress and cancer-specific worry. A separate survey assessed clinicians' views on universal testing.

RESULTS

Pathogenic germline variants were identified in 31 of 474 expanded study phase participants (6.5%), including 28 of 429 women with invasive breast cancer (6.5%). Eighteen of the 31 did not meet current genetic testing eligibility guidelines (probability of a germline pathogenic variant ≥ 10%, based on CanRisk, or Manchester score ≥ 15). Clinical management was changed for 24 of 31 women after identification of a pathogenic variant. Including 68 further women who underwent genetic testing outside the study, 44 of 542 women carried pathogenic variants (8.1%). Acceptance of universal testing was high among both patients (90 of 103, 87%) and clinicians; no decision regret or adverse impact on psychological distress or cancer-specific worry were reported.

CONCLUSION

Universal genetic testing following the diagnosis of breast cancer detects clinically significant germline pathogenic variants that might otherwise be missed because of testing guidelines. Routine testing and reporting of pathogenic variants is feasible and acceptable for both patients and clinicians.

Challenges in periodic revision of genetic testing results: Comparison of the main classification guidelines and report of a retrospective analysis involving BRCA1/BRCA2 variants of uncertain significance

In the context of cancer predisposition syndromes, it is widely known that the correct interpretation of germline variants identified in multigene panel testing is essential for adequate genetic counseling and clinical decision making, in which variants of uncertain significance (VUS) are not considered actionable findings. Thus, their periodic re-evaluation using appropriate guidelines is notably important. In the present study, we compared the performance of the main variant classification guidelines (ACMG, Sherloc and ENIGMA) in variant reassessment, using as input a BRCA1/2 VUS case series (retrospective analysis) from Brazil, an ethnically diverse and admixed country with substantial challenges in VUS reclassification. As main findings, two of the 15 VUS analyzed were reclassified as likely pathogenic by the 3 guidelines, BRCA1 c.4987-3C > G (rs397509213) and BRCA2 c.7868A > G (rs80359012). Moreover, challenges in variant classification and reassessment are described and additional in silico data about structural impact of the variant BRCA2 c.7868A > G are provided. We hypothesize that the establishment of a framework to reassess VUS could improve this process in health centers that have not yet implemented this practice. Results of this study underscore that periodic monitoring of the functional, clinical, and bioinformatics data of a VUS by a multidisciplinary team are of utmost importance in clinical practice. When there is a specific guideline for a given gene, such as ENIGMA for BRCA1/2, it should be considered the first option for variant assessment. Finally, recruitment of VUS carriers and their relatives to participate in variant segregation studies and publication of VUS reclassification results in the international scientific literature should be encouraged.

Recontact: a survey of current practices and BRCA1/2 testing in Japan

Genetic testing advances have enabled the provision of previously unavailable information on the pathogenicity of genetic variants, frequently necessitating the recontact of former patients by clinicians. In Japan, national health insurance coverage was extended to BRCA1/2 testing for the diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer for patients who meet certain criteria in 2020, and conditions necessitating recontact were expected to increase. Studies and discussions regarding recontact have been conducted in the U.S. and Europe; however, in Japan, the national discussion around recontact remains undeveloped. We conducted a cross-sectional study by interviewing 73 facilities accredited by the Japanese Organization of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer regarding the practice of recontacting patients at these facilities. Sixty-six facilities responded that they recontact patients, but only 17 facilities had a protocol for this. The most common reason for recontact was that it could benefit the patient. Facilities that did not recontact stated that they lacked the necessary personnel or services. Most facilities indicated that a recontact system should be implemented in their practice. The increased burden on too few medical personnel, unestablished systems, patient confusion, and the right not to know were cited as barriers to implementing recontact. Although developing recommendations on recontact would be useful for providing equitable healthcare in Japan, there is an urgent need to deepen the discussion on recontacting, as negative opinions about recontacting patients were observed.

Exploring the impact of the reclassification of a hereditary cancer syndrome gene variant: emerging themes from a qualitative study

The complexity of genetic variant interpretation means that a proportion of individuals who undergo genetic testing for a hereditary cancer syndrome will have their test result reclassified over time. Such a reclassification may involve a clinically significant upgrade or downgrade in pathogenicity, which may have significant implications for medical management. To date, few studies have examined the psychosocial impact of a reclassification in a hereditary cancer syndrome context. To address this gap, semi-structured telephone interviews were performed with eighteen individuals who had a BRCA1, BRCA2 or Lynch syndrome-related (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 or PMS2) gene variant reclassified. The interviews were analysed utilising an inductive, qualitative approach and emergent themes were identified by thematic analysis. Variable levels of recall amongst participants were found. Common motivations for initial testing included a significant personal and/or family history of cancer and a desire to "find an answer". No individual whose uncertain result was upgraded reported negative psychosocial outcomes; most reported adapting to their reclassified result and appraised their genetic testing experience positively. However, individuals whose likely pathogenic/pathogenic results were downgraded reported feelings of anger, shock and sadness post reclassification, highlighting that additional psychosocial support may be required for some. Genetic counselling issues and recommendations for clinical practice are outlined.

Cases in Precision Medicine: Is There an Obligation to Return Reinterpreted Genetic Results to Former Patients?

Interpretation of many genetic test results can change over time as new data accumulate. Hence, physicians who order genetic tests may subsequently receive revised reports with important implications for patients' medical treatment-even for patients who are no longer in their care. Several of the ethical principles underlying medical practice suggest an obligation to reach out to former patients with this information. Discharging that obligation can be accomplished, at a minimum, by attempting to contact the former patient with their last known contact information.

Prostate Cancer: Advances in Genetic Testing and Clinical Implications

The demand for genetic testing (GT) for prostate cancer (PCa) is expanding, but there is limited knowledge about the genetic counseling (GC) needs of men. A strong-to-moderate inherited genetic predisposition causes approximately 5–20% of prostate cancer (PCa). In men with prostate cancer, germline testing may benefit the patient by informing treatment options, and if a mutation is noticed, it may also guide screening for other cancers and have family implications for cascade genetic testing (testing of close relatives for the same germline mutation). Relatives with the same germline mutations may be eligible for early cancer detection strategies and preventive measures. Cascade family testing can be favorable for family members, but it is currently unutilized, and strategies to overcome obstacles like knowledge deficiency, family communication, lack of access to genetic services, and testing expenses are needed. In this review, we will look at the genetic factors that have been linked to prostate cancer, as well as the role of genetic counseling and testing in the early detection of advanced prostate cancer.

Rare Germline ATM Variants Influence the Development of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

PURPOSE

Germline missense variants of unknown significance in cancer-related genes are increasingly being identified with the expanding use of next-generation sequencing. The ataxia telangiectasia-mutated (ATM) gene on chromosome 11 has more than 1,000 germline missense variants of unknown significance and is a tumor suppressor. We aimed to determine if rare germline ATM variants are more frequent in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) compared with other hematologic malignancies and if they influence the clinical characteristics of CLL.

METHODS

We identified 3,128 patients (including 825 patients with CLL) in our hematologic malignancy clinic who had received clinical-grade sequencing of the entire coding region of ATM. We ascertained the comparative frequencies of germline ATM variants in categories of hematologic neoplasms, and, in patients with CLL, we determined whether these variants affected CLL-associated characteristics such as somatic 11q deletion.

RESULTS

Rare germline ATM variants are present in 24% of patients with CLL, significantly greater than that in patients with other lymphoid malignancies (16% prevalence), myeloid disease (15%), or no hematologic neoplasm (14%). Patients with CLL with germline ATM variants are younger at diagnosis and twice as likely to have 11q deletion. The ATM variant p.L2307F is present in 3% of patients with CLL, is associated with a three-fold increase in rates of somatic 11q deletion, and is a hypomorph in cell-based assays.

CONCLUSION

Germline ATM variants cluster within CLL and affect the phenotype of CLL that develops, implying that some of these variants (such as ATM p.L2307F) have functional significance and should not be ignored. Further studies are needed to determine whether these variants affect the response to therapy or account for some of the inherited risk of CLL.

Clinical and laboratory genetic counselor attitudes on the reporting of variants of uncertain significance for multigene cancer panels

Research suggests variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) present a variety of challenges for genetic counselors (GCs), nongenetics clinicians, and patients. Multigene cancer panels reveal more VUSs than single gene testing as a result of the increase in the number of genes being tested. This study surveyed 87 clinical cancer GCs involved with direct patient care and 19 laboratory GCs who provide guidance to clinicians regarding genetic test results about their attitudes on various options for the reporting of VUSs by laboratories for broad multigene cancer panels. Independent samples t-tests were utilized to compare the two groups. Based on a six-point Likert-type scale (1 = Strongly Disagree to 6 = Strongly Agree), clinical cancer GCs (M = 5.4; SD = 0.8) and laboratory GCs (M = 5.2; SD = 0.9) agreed overall that VUSs should be reported (p = 0.44; Cohen's d = 0.21). When asked about specific reporting options, both clinical cancer GCs (M = 1.9; SD = 1.1) and laboratory GCs (M = 2.1; SD = 1.4) disagreed that VUSs should be reported only for genes related to the indication for testing (p = 0.50; Cohen's d = 0.17). Overall, most GCs felt clinicians should not choose whether VUSs should be reported on genetic test results, with clinical cancer GCs (M = 1.9; SD = 1.3) feeling more strongly against it than laboratory GCs (M = 3.1; SD = 1.4; p = 0.002; Cohen's d = 0.88). Generally, GCs were more in favor of VUSs not being reported for population-based screening, with laboratory GCs (M = 4.7; SD = 0.8) agreeing more with that practice than clinical cancer GCs (M = 3.7; SD = 1.4; p = 0.001; Cohen's d = 0.80). Both clinical cancer GCs (M = 4.1; SD = 1.2) and laboratory GCs (M = 3.9; SD = 1.2) agreed additional guidelines on how to approach VUSs in clinical practice should be developed (p = 0.54; Cohen's d = 0.17). While most GCs supported the reporting of VUSs overall, our analyses suggest clinical cancer and laboratory GCs may have different attitudes toward specific VUS-related reporting options. Further research is needed to elucidate GC preferences to help inform best practices for the reporting of VUSs. The development of additional standardized guidelines on how to approach VUSs would further support clinical practice.

A multicenter study of clinical impact of variant of uncertain significance reclassification in breast, ovarian and colorectal cancer susceptibility genes

BACKGROUND

Clinical interpretation of genetic test results is complicated by variants of uncertain significance (VUS) that have an unknown impact on health but can be clarified through reclassification. There is little empirical evidence regarding VUS reclassification in oncology care settings, including the prevalence and outcomes of reclassification, and racial/ethnic differences.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of persons with and without a personal history of cancer carrying VUS (with or without an accompanying pathogenic or likely pathogenic [P/LP] variant) in breast, ovarian, and colorectal cancer predisposition genes seen at four cancer care settings (in Texas, Florida, Ohio, and New Jersey) between 2013 and 2019.

RESULTS

In 2715 individuals included in the study, 3261 VUS and 313 P/LP variants were reported; 8.1% of all individuals with VUS experienced reclassifications and rates varied significantly among cancer care settings from 4.81% to 20.19% (overall p < 0.001). Compared to their prevalence in the overall sample, reclassification rates for Black individuals were higher (13.6% vs. 19.0%), whereas the rates for Asian individuals were lower (6.3% vs. 3.5%) and rates for White and Hispanic individuals were proportional. Two-year prevalence of VUS reclassification remained steady between 2014 and 2019. Overall, 11.3% of all reclassified VUS resulted in clinically actionable findings and 4.6% subsequently changed individuals' clinical managements.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this large multisite study suggest that VUS reclassification alters clinical management, has implications for precision cancer prevention, and highlights the need for implementing practices and solutions for efficiently returning reinterpreted genetic test results.