Prevalence and spectrum of pathogenic variants among patients with multiple primary cancers evaluated by clinical characteristics

Comprehensive next-generation sequencing identifies novel putative pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants in patients with concurrent tubo-ovarian and endometrial serous and endometrioid carcinomas or precursors

BACKGROUND

Endometrial serous carcinoma (ESC) and tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) are characterized by late-stage presentation and high mortality. Current guidelines for prevention recommend risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in patients with hereditary mutations in cancer susceptibility genes. However, HGSC displays extensive genetic heterogeneity with alterations in 168 genes identified in TCGA study, but current germline testing panels are often limited to the handful of recurrently mutated genes, leaving families with rare hereditary gene mutations potentially at-risk.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if there are rare germline mutations that may aid in early identification of more patients at-risk for ESC and/or HGSC by evaluating patients with concurrent ESC, HGSC or precursor lesions, and endometrial atypical hyperplasia (CAH) or low-grade endometrial endometrioid adenocarcinoma (LGEEA).

METHODS

We performed targeted next-generation sequencing using TSO 500, a 523 gene panel, on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor and matched benign non-tumor tissue blocks from 5 patients with concurrent ESC, HGSC or precursor lesions, and CAH or LGEEA.

RESULTS

We identified germline pathogenic, likely pathogenic or uncertain significance variants in cancer susceptibility genes in 4 of 5 patients - affected genes included GLI1, PIK3R1, FOXP1, FANCD2, INPP4B and H3F3C. Notably, none of these genes were included in the commercially available germline testing panels initially used to evaluate the patients at the time of their diagnoses.

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive germline testing of patients with concurrent LGEEA or CAH and ESC, HGSC or precursor lesions may aid in early identification of relatives at-risk for cancer who may be candidates for RRSO with hysterectomy.

Germline mutations of homologous recombination genes and clinical outcomes in pancreatic cancer: a multicenter study in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Cancer susceptibility germline mutations are associated with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, the hereditary status of PDAC and its impact on survival is largely unknown in the Asian population.

METHODS

Exome sequencing was performed on 527 blood samples from PDAC individuals and analyzed for mutations in 80 oncogenic genes. Pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP) germline variants were diagnosed according to the ACMG variant classification categories. The association between germline homologous recombination gene mutations (gHRmut, including BAP1, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, ATM, BLM, BRIP1, CHEK2, NBN, MUTYH, FANCA and FANCC) and the treatment outcomes was explored in patients with stage III/IV diseases treated with first-line (1L) platinum-based versus platinum-free chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Overall, 104 of 527 (19.7%) patients carried germline P/LP variants. The most common mutated genes were BRCA2 (3.60%), followed by ATR (2.66%) and ATM (1.9%). After a median follow-up duration of 38.3-months (95% confidence interval, 95% CI 35.0-43.7), the median overall survival (OS) was not significantly different among patients with gHRmut, non-HR germline mutations, or no mutation (P = 0.43). Among the 320 patients with stage III/IV disease who received 1L combination chemotherapy, 32 (10%) had gHRmut. Of them, patients receiving 1L platinum-based chemotherapy exhibited a significantly longer median OS compared to those with platinum-free chemotherapy, 26.1 months (95% CI 12.7-33.7) versus 9.6 months (95% CI 5.9-17.6), P = 0.001. However, the median OS of patients without gHRmut was 14.5 months (95% CI 13.2-16.9) and 12.6 months (95% CI 10.8-14.7) for patients receiving 1L platinum-based and platinum-free chemotherapy, respectively (P = 0.22). These results were consistent after adjusting for potential confounding factors including age, tumor stage, performance status, and baseline CA 19.9 in the multivariate Cox regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that nearly 20% of Taiwanese PDAC patients carried germline P/LP variants. The longer survival observed in gHRmut patients treated with 1L platinum-based chemotherapy highlights the importance of germline testing for all patients with advanced PDAC at diagnosis.

Germline whole genome sequencing in adults with multiple primary tumors

Multiple primary tumors (MPTs) are a harbinger of hereditary cancer syndromes. Affected individuals often fit genetic testing criteria for a number of hereditary cancer genes and undergo multigene panel testing. Other genomic testing options, such as whole exome (WES) and whole genome sequencing (WGS) are available, but the utility of these genomic approaches as a second-tier test for those with uninformative multigene panel testing has not been explored. Here, we report our germline sequencing results from WGS in 9 patients with MPTs who had non-informative multigene panel testing. Following germline WGS, sequence (agnostic or 735 selected genes) and copy number variant (CNV) analysis was performed according to the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) standards and guidelines for interpreting sequence variants and reporting CNVs. In this cohort, WGS, as a second-tier test, did not identify additional pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes. Although we identified a CHEK2 likely pathogenic variant and a MUTYH pathogenic variant, both were previously identified in the multigene panels and were not explanatory for the presented type of tumors. CNV analysis also failed to identify any pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes. In summary, after multigene panel testing, WGS did not reveal any additional pathogenic variants in patients with MPTs. Our study, based on a small cohort of patients with MPT, suggests that germline gene panel testing may be sufficient to investigate these cases. Future studies with larger sample sizes may further elucidate the additional utility of WGS in MPTs.

Germline multigene panel testing of patients with endometrial cancer

Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynecological malignancy in developed countries. The present study aimed to determine the frequency of germline pathogenic variants (PV) in patients with EC. In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, germline genetic testing (GGT) was performed in 527 patients with EC using a next generation sequencing panel targeting 226 genes, including 5 Lynch syndrome (LS) and 14 hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) predisposition genes, and 207 candidate predisposition genes. Gene-level risks were calculated using 1,662 population-matched controls (PMCs). Patients were sub-categorized to fulfill GGT criteria for LS, HBOC, both or none. A total of 60 patients (11.4%) carried PV in LS (5.1%) and HBOC (6.6%) predisposition genes, including two carriers of double PV. PV in LS genes conferred a significantly higher EC risk [odds ratio (OR), 22.4; 95% CI, 7.8-64.3; P=1.8×10^-17] than the most frequently altered HBOC genes BRCA1 (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.6-9.5; P=0.001), BRCA2 (OR, 7.4; 95% CI, 1.9-28.9; P=0.002) and CHEK2 (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.0-9.9; P=0.04). Furthermore, >6% of patients with EC not fulfilling LS or HBOC GGT indication criteria carried a PV in a clinically relevant gene. Carriers of PV in LS genes had a significantly lower age of EC onset than non-carriers (P=0.01). Another 11.0% of patients carried PV in a candidate gene (the most frequent were FANCA and MUTYH); however, their individual frequencies did not differ from PMCs (except for aggregated frequency of loss-of-function variants in POLE/POLD1; OR, 10.44; 95% CI, 1.1-100.5; P=0.012). The present study demonstrated the importance of GGT in patients with EC. The increased risk of EC of PV carriers in HBOC genes suggests that the diagnosis of EC should be included in the HBOC GGT criteria.

One Patient With 4 Different Primary Cancers: A Case Report

Background

The development of medicine, especially in oncology, has been helping prolong the cancer patients' survival, but also leads to increasing the possibility of getting multiple cancers. However, the possibility of getting 4 primary cancers in 4 different sites is extremely rare.

Case presentation

A 63-year-old female patient was diagnosed with thyroid cancer in 2018, and then with right colon cancer in 2019. In 2020, this patient was diagnosed with left renal pelvis cancer, and most recently, in April 2022, she was hospitalized with bladder cancer diagnosis. Thanks to being closely and regularly followed-up, her malignancies had been detected early and treated suitably. Her health remains stable now and she is under following-up.

Conclusion

Even though developing another primary cancer in a cancer survivor is not uncommon now and has the tendency to increase, a patient having 4 primary cancers in 4 different sites is still extremely rare and should be noticed, further followed up and investigated. Cancer patients and survivors need to be followed-up regularly, to early detect not only the progression or recurrence but also the second cancer (if it exists), to get timely and suitable treatment.

Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Providing Evidence of Predisposition Genes

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is one of the cancers most influenced by hereditary factors. A fourth to a fifth of unselected EOC patients carry pathogenic variants (PVs) in a number of genes, the majority of which encode for proteins involved in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) pathways. PVs in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are responsible for a substantial fraction of hereditary EOC. In addition, PV genes involved in the MMR pathway account for 10–15% of hereditary EOC. The identification of women with homologous recombination (HR)-deficient EOCs has significant clinical implications, concerning chemotherapy regimen planning and development as well as the use of targeted therapies such as poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. With several genes involved, the complexity of genetic testing increases. In this context, next-generation sequencing (NGS) allows testing for multiple genes simultaneously with a rapid turnaround time. In this review, we discuss the EOC risk assessment in the era of NGS.

Subsequent primary cancer risk among five-year survivors of adolescent and young adult cancers

BACKGROUND

A comprehensive examination of the incidence and mortality of subsequent primary cancers (SPCs) among adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors in the US is lacking.

METHODS

Cancer incidence and mortality among 170,404 ≥ 5-year cancer survivors aged 15-39 years at first primary cancer diagnosis during 1975-2013 in 9 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were compared to those in the general population using standardized incidence ratio (SIR), absolute excess incidence (AEI), standardized mortality ratio (SMR), and absolute excess mortality (AEM).

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 14.6 years, 13,420 SPC cases and 5,008 SPC deaths occurred among survivors (excluding the same-site as index cancer), corresponding to 25% higher incidence (95%CI = 1.23-1.27; AEI = 10.8 per 10,000) and 84% higher mortality (95%CI = 1.79-1.89; AEM = 9.2 per 10,000) than that in the general population. Overall SPC risk was statistically significantly higher for 20 of 29 index cancers for incidence and 26 for mortality, with the highest SIR among female Hodgkin lymphoma survivors (SIR = 3.05, 95%CI = 2.88-3.24; AEI = 73.0 per 10,000) and the highest SMR among small intestine cancer survivors (SMR = 6.97, 95%CI = 4.80-9.79; AEM = 64.1 per 10,000). Type-specific SPC risks varied substantially by index cancers; however, SPCs of the female breast, lung, and colorectum combined constituted 36% of all SPC cases and 39% of all SPC deaths, with lung cancer alone representing 11% and 24% of all cases and deaths, respectively.

CONCLUSION

AYA cancer survivors are almost twice as likely to die from a new primary cancer as the general population, highlighting the need for primary care clinicians to prioritize cancer prevention and targeted surveillance strategies in these individuals.

Incidence and Survival of Multiple Primary Cancers in US Women With a Gynecologic Cancer

Objectives

To evaluate risk of a second cancer and associated survival times in United States women with diagnosis of cancer.

Methods

The Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database was queried for 2 cohorts of women aged 18 - 89 with either an index gynecologic or non-gynecologic cancer diagnosed between 1992 - 2017. Index cases were followed to determine if a second primary cancer was subsequently diagnosed; defined according to SEER multiple primary and histology coding rules. Standard Incident Ratios (SIR) and latency intervals between index diagnosis and second primary diagnosis were evaluated. Among those who developed a second primary cancer, median survival times from diagnosis of second primary cancer were also calculated.

Results

Between 1992 - 2017, 227,313 US women were diagnosed with an index gynecological cancer and 1,483,016 were diagnosed with an index non-gynecologic cancer. Among patients with index gynecologic cancer, 7.78% developed a non-gynecologic subsequent primary cancer. The risk of developing any non-gynecologic cancer following an index gynecologic cancer was higher than the risk in the general population (SIR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04 - 1.07). Organs especially at risk were Thyroid (SIR 1.45), Colon and Rectum (SIR 1.23), and Urinary System (SIR 1.33). Among women diagnosed with an index non-gynecologic cancer, 0.99% were diagnosed with a subsequent gynecologic cancer. The risk of developing a gynecologic cancer following a non-gynecologic cancer was also elevated compared to the average risk of the general population (SIR 1.05, 1.03 - 1.07), with uterine cancer having the highest SIR of 1.13.

Conclusion

The risk of a developing a second primary cancer and the corresponding survival time is based on the order and site of the index and subsequent cancer. Surveillance guidelines should be examined further to optimize survivorship programs.