Disparities in cancer genetics care by race/ethnicity among pan-cancer patients with pathogenic germline variants

Significance of Multi-Cancer Genome Profiling Testing for Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis of 3326 Cases from Japan's National Database

Background: Breast cancer (BC) has the highest morbidity rate and the second-highest mortality rate of all cancers among women. Recently, multi-cancer genome profiling (multi-CGP) tests have become clinically available. In this study, we aimed to clarify the significance of multi-CGP testing of BC by using the large clinical dataset from The Center for Cancer Genomics and Advanced Therapeutics (C-CAT) profiling database in Japan. Materials and Methods: A total of 3744 BC cases were extracted from the C-CAT database, which enrolled 60,250 patients between June 2019 and October 2023. Of the 3744 BC cases, a total of 3326 cases for which the C-CAT included information on ER, PR, and HER2 status were classified into four subtypes, including TNBC, HR+/HER2-, HR+/HER2+, and HR-/HER2+. Comparisons between groups were performed by the χ2 test or Fisher's exact test using EZR. Kaplan-Meier curves were created using the log-rank test. Results: Of all 3326 cases analyzed, 1114 (33.5%) were TNBC cases, HR+/HER2- accounted for 1787 cases (53.7%), HR+/HER2+ for 260 cases (7.8%), and HR-/HER2+ for 165 cases (5.0%). Genetic abnormalities were most frequently detected in TP53 (58.0%), PIK3CA (35.5%), MYC (18.7%), FGF19 (15.5%), and GATA3 (15.1%) across all BCs. The rate of TMB-High was 12.3%, and the rate of MSI-High was 0.3%, in all BC cases. Therapeutic drugs were proposed for patients with mutations in six genes: PIK3CA, ERBB2, PTEN, FGFR1, ESR1, and AKT1. The prognoses of HR+/HER2- cases were significantly (p = 0.044) better in the treated group than in the untreated group. Conclusions: These findings suggest that cancer gene panel testing is useful for HR+/HER2- cases.

Basket Trials: Past, Present, and Future

Large-scale tumor molecular profiling has revealed that diverse cancer histologies are driven by common pathways with unifying biomarkers that can be exploited therapeutically. Disease-agnostic basket trials have been increasingly utilized to test biomarker-driven therapies across cancer types. These trials have led to drug approvals and improved the lives of patients while simultaneously advancing our understanding of cancer biology. This review focuses on the practicalities of implementing basket trials, with an emphasis on molecularly targeted trials. We examine the biologic subtleties of genomic biomarker and patient selection, discuss previous successes in drug development facilitated by basket trials, describe certain novel targets and drugs, and emphasize practical considerations for participant recruitment and study design. This review also highlights strategies for aiding patient access to basket trials. As basket trials become more common, steps to ensure equitable implementation of these studies will be critical for molecularly targeted drug development.

Genomic landscape of comprehensive genomic profiling in patients with malignant solid tumors in Japan

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) can aid the discovery of clinically useful, candidate antitumor agents; however, the variant annotations sometimes differ among the various types of CGP tests as well as the public database. The aim of this study is to clarify the genomic landscape of evaluating detected variants in patients with a malignant solid tumor.

METHODS

The present, cross-sectional study used data from 57,084 patients with a malignant solid tumor who underwent CGP at the Center for Cancer Genomics and Advanced Therapeutics (C-CAT) between June 1, 2019 and August 18, 2023. The pathogenicity of the variants was annotated using public databases.

RESULTS

As a result of re-annotation of the detected variants, 20.1% were pathogenic and 1.4% were benign. The mean number of pathogenic variants was 4.30 (95% confidence interval: 4.27-4.32) per patient. Of the entire cohort, 5.7% had no pathogenic variant. The co-occurrence of the genes depended on the tumor type. Germline findings were detected in 6.2%, 8.8%, and 15.8% of the patients using a tumor/normal panel, tumor-only panel, and liquid panel, respectively, with the most common gene being BRCA2 followed by TP53 and BRCA1.

CONCLUSIONS

The detected variants should be re-annotated because several benign variants or variants of unknown significance were included in the CGP, and the genomic landscape derived from these results will help researchers and physicians interpret the results of CGP tests. The method of extracting presumptive, germline, pathogenic variants from patients using a tumor-only panel or circulating tumor DNA panel requires improvement.

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.

Oncologists' perceptions of tumor genomic profiling and barriers to communicating secondary hereditary risks to African American cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Tumor genomic profiling (TGP) identifies targets for precision cancer treatments, but also secondary hereditary risks. Oncologists are poorly trained to communicate the results of TGP, especially among patients with lower health literacy, poorer genetics knowledge, and higher mistrust. African American (AA) patients are especially vulnerable to poor understanding due to significant cancer disparities and lower uptake of TGP. The goal of this research is to inform the development of an internet-based brief educational support for oncologists to prepare them to provide better decisional support related to TGP for their AA cancer patients.

METHODS

This mixed-methods study used semi-structured interviews of oncologists to inform development of an online survey with a convenience sample of US-based oncologists (n = 50) to assess perceptions of the challenges of TGP and communicating results to AA patients.

RESULTS

Most interviewed oncologists felt it was important to consider racial/cultural differences when communicating about hereditary risks. Cost, family dynamics, discrimination concerns, and medical mistrust were identified as particularly salient. Survey respondents' views related to AAs and perceptions of TGP were strongly associated with years since completing training, with recent graduates expressing stronger agreement with statements identifying barriers/disadvantages to TGP for AA patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Oncologists who had more recently completed training expressed more negative perceptions of TGP and more perceived challenges in communicating about TGP with their AA patients. Focused training for oncologists that addresses barriers specific to AAs may be helpful in supporting improved communication about TGP and improved decisional support for AA patients with cancer considering TGP to evaluate their tumors.

Mainstreaming in parallel with ovarian cancer tumor testing to improve genetic testing uptake

OBJECTIVES

Although genetic testing (GT) is universally recommended for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), rates are low (34%). In 1/2019, we implemented mainstreaming-GT in parallel with tumor testing via MSK-IMPACT within oncology clinics. We sought to determine GT rates pre/post-mainstreaming and patient characteristics associated with GT.

METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed EOC seen at our institution from 7/1/2015-3/31/2022 were included. Clinical data were abstracted including social determinants of health (SDOH) variables, race/ethnicity, marital status, insurance, language, comorbidities, employment, and Yost index, a measure of socioeconomic status. GT rates were calculated overall and pre-/post-mainstreaming (1/2019). Logistic regression models were fit to identify variables associated with GT.

RESULTS

Of 1742 patients with EOC, 1591 (91%) underwent GT. Rates of GT increased from 87% to 95% after mainstreaming (p < 0.001). Among 151 patients not undergoing GT, major reasons were lack of provider recommendation (n = 76, 50%) and logistical issues (n = 38, 25%) with few declining (n = 14, 9%) or having medical complications preventing GT (n = 7, 4.6%). High-grade serous histology, advanced stage (III/IV), and having a spouse/partner were associated with increased GT uptake (p < 0.01). Among SDOH variables, there were no differences by insurance, Yost score, language, comorbidities, employment, or race/ethnicity. In multivariable models, likelihood of GT increased with mainstreaming, even after adjustment for histology, stage, and marital status (OR 3.77; 95% CI: 2.56-5.66).

CONCLUSIONS

Mainstreaming increased the likelihood of GT in patients with EOC. We found lower testing rates in patients without partners/spouses, non-high-grade serous histology, and early-stage disease, representing potential areas for future interventions.

Disparities in Genetic Testing for Neurologic Disorders

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Genetic testing is now the standard of care for many neurologic conditions. Health care disparities are unfortunately widespread in the US health care system, but disparities in the utilization of genetic testing for neurologic conditions have not been studied. We tested the hypothesis that access to and results of genetic testing vary according to race, ethnicity, sex, socioeconomic status, and insurance status for adults with neurologic conditions.

METHODS

We analyzed retrospective data from patients who underwent genetic evaluation and testing through our institution's neurogenetics program. We tested for differences between demographic groups in 3 steps of a genetic evaluation pathway: (1) attending a neurogenetic evaluation, (2) completing genetic testing, and (3) receiving a diagnostic result. We compared patients on this genetic evaluation pathway with the population of all neurology outpatients at our institution, using univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Between 2015 and 2022, a total of 128,440 patients were seen in our outpatient neurology clinics and 2,540 patients underwent genetic evaluation. Black patients were less than half as likely as White patients to be evaluated (odds ratio [OR] 0.49, p < 0.001), and this disparity was similar after controlling for other demographic factors in multivariable analysis. Patients from the least wealthy quartile of zip codes were also less likely to be evaluated (OR 0.67, p < 0.001). Among patients who underwent evaluation, there were no disparities in the likelihood of completing genetic testing, nor in the likelihood of a diagnostic result after adjusting for age. Analyses restricted to specific indications for genetic testing supported these findings.

DISCUSSION

We observed unequal utilization of our clinical neurogenetics program for patients from marginalized and minoritized demographic groups, especially Black patients. Among patients who do undergo evaluation, all groups benefit similarly from genetic testing when it is indicated. Understanding and removing barriers to accessing genetic testing will be essential to health care equity and optimal care for all patients with neurologic disorders.

Pathogenic germline variants in patients with endometrial cancer of diverse ancestry

BACKGROUND

Racial disparities in outcomes exist in endometrial cancer (EC). The contribution of ancestry-based variations in germline pathogenic variants (gPVs) is unknown.

METHODS

Germline assessment of ≥76 cancer predisposition genes was performed in patients with EC undergoing tumor-normal Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets sequencing from January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2021. Self-reported race/ethnicity and Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry data classified patients into groups. Genetic ancestry was inferred from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets. Rates of gPV and genetic counseling were compared by ancestry.

RESULTS

Among 1625 patients with EC, 216 (13%) had gPVs; 15 had >1 gPV. Rates of gPV varied by self-reported ancestry (Ashkenazi Jewish, 40/202 [20%]; Asian, 15/124 [12%]; Black/African American (AA), 12/171 [7.0%]; Hispanic, 15/124 [12%]; non-Hispanic (NH) White, 129/927 [14%]; missing, 5/77 [6.5%]; p = .009], with similar findings by genetic ancestry (p < .001). We observed a lower likelihood of gPVs in patients of Black/AA (odds ratio [OR], 0.44; 95% CI, 0.22-0.81) and African (AFR) ancestry (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18-0.85) and a higher likelihood in patients of Ashkenazi Jewish genetic ancestry (OR, 1.62; 95% CI; 1.11-2.34) compared with patients of non-Hispanic White/European ancestry, even after adjustment for age and molecular subtype. Somatic landscape influenced gPVs with lower rates of microsatellite instability-high tumors in patients of Black/AA and AFR ancestry. Among those with newly identified gPVs (n = 114), 102 (89%) were seen for genetic counseling, with lowest rates among Black/AA (75%) and AFR patients (67%).

CONCLUSIONS

In those with EC, gPV and genetic counseling varied by ancestry, with lowest rates among Black/AA and AFR patients, potentially contributing to disparities in outcomes given implications for treatment and cancer prevention.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Black women with endometrial cancer do worse than White women, and there are many reasons for this disparity. Certain genetic changes from birth (mutations) can increase the risk of cancer, and it is unknown if rates of these changes are different between different ancestry groups. Genetic mutations in 1625 diverse women with endometrial cancer were studied and the lowest rates of mutations and genetic counseling were found in Black and African ancestry women. This could affect their treatment options as well as their families and may make disparities worse.

Exploring the perspectives of underrepresented voices: Perceptions and experiences of uterine cancer for black African, Caribbean, black British, and mixed-black women in the UK to develop strategies for early symptom presentation

OBJECTIVES

The uterine cancer (UC) mortality rate in the UK is significantly higher for women who belong to a Black ethnic group compared to those from other ethnic groups. This study aimed to understand the views and experiences of UC amongst Black ethnic minority women in the UK, with a focus on awareness and presentation of red-flag symptoms.

METHODS

Women of Black African, Caribbean, Black British and Mixed-Black ethnicity were purposefully recruited to participate in focus groups and individual semi-structured interviews.

RESULTS

Twenty women from different regions in England participated in the study. Reflexive thematic analysis of the data led to the identification of three main themes: 1) Healthcare inequities; 2) Support and sense making with other Black women; and 3) Knowledge dissemination, mobilisation, and empowerment. Perceptions of inequitable healthcare provision and distrust influenced how participants, and their peer networks, approached seeking assistance from healthcare professionals. Concerns were also raised about culturally insensitive information resources, including issues of language, literacy, and representation, all of which served as potential barriers for women within Black ethnic minority groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The deficiency of targeted knowledge mobilisation and specific UC information aimed at Black ethnicity women living in the UK, reportedly contributes to the dissemination of misconceptions and an atmosphere of apprehension around a UC diagnosis. The insights from this study highlight the significance of designing culturally sensitive strategies to promote informed decision-making and empower the dissemination of accurate health knowledge amongst Black women.

Precision Oncology: 2023 in Review

SUMMARY

This article presents a review of recent major advances in precision oncology and the future implications of these advances, specifying the iterative progress achieved from the end of 2022 through 2023. We discuss the different classes of precision oncology drugs and associated biomarkers as well as the improvements in clinical trial design that have enabled the efficient testing of these drugs.

Germline BRCA testing in pancreatic cancer: improving awareness, timing, turnaround, and uptake

Prognosis is generally poor for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. However, patients with germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations (gBRCAm) may benefit from first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and maintenance therapy with the poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib following at least 16 weeks of first-line platinum-based chemotherapy without disease progression. Germline breast cancer gene (BRCA) testing is therefore important to ensure that patients receive the most effective treatment. In addition, testing for other DNA damage response gene mutations beyond gBRCAm may also guide treatment decisions. However, clinical pathways for genetic testing are often suboptimal, leading to delays in treatment initiation or missed opportunities for personalized therapy. Barriers to testing include low rates of referral and uptake, delays to referral and slow result turnaround times, cost, and biopsy and assay limitations if somatic testing is performed, leading to the requirement for subsequent dedicated germline testing. Low rates of referral may result from lack of awareness among physicians of the clinical value of testing, coupled with low confidence in interpreting test results and poor availability of genetic counseling services. Among patients, barriers to uptake may include similar lack of awareness of the clinical value of testing, anxiety regarding the implications of test results, lack of insurance coverage, fear of negative insurance implications, and socioeconomic factors. Potential solutions include innovative approaches to testing pathways, including 'mainstreaming' of testing in which BRCA tests are routinely arranged by the treating oncologist, with the involvement of genetic counselors if a patient is found to have a gBRCAm. More recently, the utility of multigene panel analyses has also been explored. Access to genetic counseling may also be improved through initiatives such as having a genetic counseling appointment for all new patient visits and telemedicine approaches, including the use of telephone consultations or DVD-assisted counseling. Educational programs will also be beneficial, and cost effectiveness is likely to improve as the number of targeted treatments increases and when the earlier detection of tumors in family members following cascade testing is considered.

Germline Pathogenic Variants and Genetic Counseling by Ancestry in Patients With Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate rates of germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PVs) and genetic counseling by ancestry in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

METHODS

Patients with pathologically confirmed EOC who underwent clinical tumor-normal sequencing from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020, inclusive of germline analysis of ≥76 genes were included. Patients with newly identified PVs were referred for Clinical Genetics Service (CGS) counseling. Ancestry groups were defined using self-reported race/ethnicity and Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) heritage. Genetic ancestry was inferred computationally using validated algorithms. Logistic regression models were built.

RESULTS

Of 1,266 patients, self-reported ancestry (AJ, 17%; Asian, 10%; Black/African American, 5.4%; Hispanic, 6.2%; non-Hispanic White, 57%; other, 0.16%; unknown, 4.0%) correlated with genetic ancestry (AJ ancestry, 18%; admixed, 10%; African, 4%; East Asian [EAS], 6%; European, 56%; Native American, 0.2%; South Asian [SAS], 4%; unknown, 2%). Germline PVs were observed in 313 (25%) patients, including 195 (15%) with PVs in EOC-associated genes. Those with PVs were younger at diagnosis (59 v 62 years; P < .001) and more likely to have high-grade serous ovarian cancer (83% v 72%; P = .009). PV prevalence varied between ancestry groups (P < .001), with highest rates in the AJ (39.9%) and Asian (26.5%) groups and similar rates (>10%) across other ancestry groups. Use of genetic ancestry demonstrated similar findings and further characterized high rates of PV in EAS/SAS groups. Younger age, high-grade serous histology, and self-reported AJ or Asian ancestry were associated with PV in an EOC-associated gene. Rates of CGS counseling for newly identified PVs were high (80%) across ancestry groups.

CONCLUSION

Rates of PV, particularly in EOC-associated genes, were high regardless of ancestry, with similar rates of counseling between groups, emphasizing the importance of universal genetic testing in all patients with EOC.

Inborn Errors of Immunity in Hidradenitis Suppurativa Pathogenesis and Disease Burden

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), also known as Verneuil's disease and acne inversa, is a prevalent, debilitating, and understudied inflammatory skin disease. It is marked by repeated bouts of pathological inflammation causing pain, hyperplasia, aberrant healing, and fibrosis. HS is difficult to manage and has many unmet medical needs. There is clinical and pharmacological evidence for extensive etiological heterogeneity with HS, suggesting that this clinical diagnosis is capturing a spectrum of disease entities. Human genetic studies provide robust insight into disease pathogenesis. They also can be used to resolve etiological heterogeneity and to identify drug targets. However, HS has not been extensively investigated with well-powered genetic studies. Here, we review what is known about its genetic architecture. We identify overlap in molecular, cellular, and clinical features between HS and inborn errors of immunity (IEI). This evidence indicates that HS may be an underrecognized component of IEI and suggests that undiagnosed IEI are present in HS cohorts. Inborn errors of immunity represent a salient opportunity for rapidly resolving the immunological landscape of HS pathogenesis, for prioritizing drug repurposing studies, and for improving the clinical management of HS.

Germline drivers of gynecologic carcinosarcomas

OBJECTIVES

To describe the prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (gPVs) in endometrial and ovarian carcinosarcomas and determine if gPVs are drivers of carcinosarcoma.

METHODS

Patients with endometrial or ovarian carcinosarcomas who underwent clinical tumor-normal sequencing from 1/1/2015 to 6/1/2021 and consented to germline assessment of ≥76 cancer predisposition genes were included. In patients with gPVs, biallelic inactivation was identified through analysis of loss of heterozygosity and somatic pathogenic alterations.

RESULTS

Of 216 patients identified, 167 (77%) were diagnosed with endometrial carcinosarcoma and 49 (23%) with ovarian carcinosarcoma. Overall, 33 gPVs were observed in 29 patients (13%); 20 gPVs (61%) had biallelic loss in tumors. The rate of high-penetrance gPVs overall was 7% (16 of 216); 88% of high-penetrance gPVs had biallelic loss. In the endometrial carcinosarcoma cohort, 22 gPVs were found in 19 (11%) of 167 patients; 12 gPVs (55%) had biallelic loss in tumors, including 8 (89%) of 9 in high-penetrance gPVs. Among the ovarian carcinosarcoma cohort, 11 gPVs were found in 10 (20%) of 49 patients; 8 gPVs (73%) had biallelic loss in tumors, and all evaluable high-penetrance gPVs (n = 6) had biallelic loss. All gPVs in homologous recombination (BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51C) and Lynch syndrome (MSH2, MSH6) genes had biallelic loss in tumors (n = 15).

CONCLUSIONS

gPVs in genes affecting homologous recombination- or Lynch-associated mismatch repair exhibited biallelic inactivation within tumors, suggesting likely drivers of gynecologic carcinosarcoma. Our data support germline testing for patients with gynecologic carcinosarcomas, given implications for treatment and risk-reduction in patients and at-risk family members.