An overview of genetic services delivery for hereditary breast cancer

Clinical Impact of Constitutional Genomic Testing on Current Breast Cancer Care

The most commonly diagnosed cancer in women worldwide is cancer of the breast. Up to 20% of familial cases are attributable to pathogenic mutations in high-penetrance (BReast CAncer gene 1 [BRCA1], BRCA2, tumor protein p53 [TP53], partner and localizer of breast cancer 2 [PALB2]) or moderate-penetrance (checkpoint kinase 2 [CHEK2], Ataxia-telangiectasia mutated [ATM], RAD51C, RAD51D) breast-cancer-predisposing genes. Most of the breast-cancer-predisposing genes are involved in DNA damage repair via homologous recombination pathways. Understanding these pathways can facilitate the development of risk-reducing and therapeutic strategies. The number of breast cancer patients undergoing testing for pathogenic mutations in these genes is rapidly increasing due to various factors. Advances in multigene panel testing have led to increased detection of pathogenic mutation carriers at high risk for developing breast cancer and contralateral breast cancer. However, the lack of long-term clinical outcome data and incomplete understanding of variants, particularly for moderate-risk genes limits clinical application. In this review, we have summarized the key functions, risks, and prognosis of breast-cancer-predisposing genes listed in the National Health Service (NHS) England National Genomic Test Directory for inherited breast cancer and provide an update on current management implications including surgery, radiotherapy, systemic treatments, and post-treatment surveillance.

Sociodemographic and Clinical Characteristics Associated with Genetic Testing among Cancer Survivors: Evidence from Three Cancer Registries

INTRODUCTION

Genetic tests, including germline and tumor (somatic) testing, can optimize the clinical care and outcomes for cancer patients and their family members. However, evidence on cancer patients' use of genetic testing and discussions about it with healthcare providers is limited.

METHODS

Study participants included cancer survivors aged 18 or older, drawn from the 2021 Health Information and National Trends Survey (HINTS)-Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) linked database, which comprises three US cancer registries: Iowa, New Mexico, and the Greater Bay Area. Sociodemographic factors (e.g., age, sex, income, education) at the time of the survey and clinical characteristics (e.g., cancer site, stage) at the time of diagnosis were compared based on self-reported genetic testing status and provider discussions, using survey design-adjusted analysis.

RESULTS

The weighted study sample comprised 415,978 cancer survivors with a mean age of 70.5 years at the time of the survey. Overall, 17.0% reported having germline testing, 8.5% having tumor testing, and 8.6% discussing tumor testing with their healthcare providers. Higher proportions of germline genetic testing were observed among survivors under age 65 at the time of the survey, females, holding college degrees, and with private insurance coverage compared to their respective counterparts - males, aged 65 or above when surveyed, with lower educational attainment, and with public insurance or uninsured. The proportion of those who reported tumor testing was greater for those diagnosed in recent years (2015-2017 vs. before 2002). Regarding clinical characteristics, survivors with ovarian and breast cancers had a 7.0-36.4% higher prevalence of both testing compared to those with other cancer types lacking germline indication. More cancer survivors diagnosed at distant stages (vs. regional) or between 2015 and 2017 (vs. 2003-2010) reported having provider discussions about tumor testing.

CONCLUSION

Findings showed that the highest reports of germline testing were among young female cancer survivors and those with higher education and private insurance. Survivors diagnosed in recent years or with advanced-stage disease were more likely to report discussing tumor testing with providers. Further research is warranted to better understand the barriers and educational needs of cancer patients, caregivers, and providers to optimize genetic testing strategies.

Public Preferences for Genetic and Genomic Risk-Informed Chronic Disease Screening and Early Detection: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments

PURPOSE

Genetic and genomic testing can provide valuable information on individuals' risk of chronic diseases, presenting an opportunity for risk-tailored disease screening to improve early detection and health outcomes. The acceptability, uptake and effectiveness of such programmes is dependent on public preferences for the programme features. This study aims to conduct a systematic review of discrete choice experiments assessing preferences for genetic/genomic risk-tailored chronic disease screening.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, EconLit and Cochrane Library were searched in October 2023 for discrete choice experiment studies assessing preferences for genetic or genomic risk-tailored chronic disease screening. Eligible studies were double screened, extracted and synthesised through descriptive statistics and content analysis of themes. Bias was assessed using an existing quality checklist.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included. Most studies focused on cancer screening (n = 10) and explored preferences for testing of rare, high-risk variants (n = 10), largely within a targeted population (e.g. subgroups with family history of disease). Two studies explored preferences for the use of polygenic risk scores (PRS) at a population level. Twenty-six programme attributes were identified, with most significantly impacting preferences. Survival, test accuracy and screening impact were most frequently reported as most important. Depending on the clinical context and programme attributes and levels, estimated uptake of hypothetical programmes varied from no participation to almost full participation (97%).

CONCLUSION

The uptake of potential programmes would strongly depend on specific programme features and the disease context. In particular, careful communication of potential survival benefits and likely genetic/genomic test accuracy might encourage uptake of genetic and genomic risk-tailored disease screening programmes. As the majority of the literature focused on high-risk variants and cancer screening, further research is required to understand preferences specific to PRS testing at a population level and targeted genomic testing for different disease contexts.

Cancer genetic counselling for hereditary breast cancer in the era of precision oncology

A relevant percentage of breast cancers (BCs) are tied to pathogenetic (P)/likely pathogenetic (LP) variants in predisposing genes. The knowledge of P/LP variants is an essential element in the management of BC patients since the first diagnosis because it influences surgery and subsequent oncological treatments and follow-up. Moreover, patients with metastatic BCs can benefit from personalized treatment if carriers of P/LP in BRCA1/2 genes. Multigene panels allow the identification of other predisposing genes with an impact on management. Cascade genetic testing for healthy family members allows personalized preventive strategies. Here, we review the advances and the challenges of Cancer Genetic Counseling (CGC). We focus on the area of oncology directed to hereditary BC management describing the peculiar way to lead CGC and how CGC changes over time. The authors describe the impact of genetic testing by targeted approach or universal approach on the management of BC according to the stage at diagnosis. Moreover, they describe the burden of CGC and testing and future perspectives to widely offer testing. A new perspective is needed for models of service delivery of CGC and testing, beyond formal genetic counselling. A broader genetic test can be quickly usable in clinical practice for comprehensive BC management and personalized prevention in the era of precision oncology.

Genetics Visit Uptake Among Individuals Receiving Clinically Actionable Genomic Screening Results

Importance

Screening unselected populations for clinically actionable genetic disease risk can improve ascertainment and facilitate risk management. Genetics visits may encourage at-risk individuals to perform recommended management, but little has been reported on genetics visit completion or factors associated with completion in genomic screening programs.

Objective

To identify factors associated with postdisclosure genetics visits in a genomic screening cohort.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a cohort study of biobank data in a health care system in central Pennsylvania. Participants' exome sequence data were reviewed for pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) results in all genes on the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics Secondary Findings list. Clinically confirmed results were disclosed by phone and letter. Participants included adult MyCode biobank participants who received P/LP results between July 2015 and November 2019. Data were analyzed from May 2021 to March 2022.

Exposure

Clinically confirmed P/LP result disclosed by phone or letter.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Completion of genetics visit in which the result was discussed and variables associated with completion were assessed by electronic health record (EHR) review.

Results

Among a total of 1160 participants (703 [60.6%] female; median [IQR] age, 57.0 [42.1-68.5] years), fewer than half of participants (551 of 1160 [47.5%]) completed a genetics visit. Younger age (odds ratio [OR] for age 18-40 years, 2.98; 95% CI, 1.40-6.53; OR for age 41-65 years, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.22-4.74; OR for age 66-80 years, 2.60; 95% CI, 1.41-4.98 vs age ≥81 years); female sex (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.14-1.96); being married (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.23-2.47) or divorced (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.11-2.91); lower Charlson comorbidity index (OR for score of 0-2, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.16-2.68; OR for score of 3-4, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.18-2.54 vs score of ≥5); EHR patient portal use (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.06-1.89); living closer to a genetics clinic (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.14-2.36 for <8.9 miles vs >20.1 miles); successful results disclosure (OR for disclosure by genetic counselor, 16.32; 95% CI, 8.16-37.45; OR for disclosure by research assistant, 20.30; 95% CI, 10.25-46.31 vs unsuccessful phone disclosure); and having a hereditary cancer result (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.28-3.58 vs other disease risk) were significantly associated with higher rates of genetics visit completion. Preference to follow up with primary care was the most common reported reason for declining a genetics visit (68 of 152 patients [44.7%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study of a biobank-based population genomic screening program suggests that targeted patient engagement, improving multidisciplinary coordination, and reducing barriers to follow-up care may be necessary for enhancing genetics visit uptake.

Double versus Single Primary Malignant Neoplasm of Breast and Colorectal Cancer: A Case-Control Study

PURPOSE

Breast cancer (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) are common in female. This study compared survival time between women affected with both cancers with ones with single BC or single CRC.

METHOD

Medical records of subjects with both BC & CRC (June 1, 2010, to June 30, 2021) were reviewed. Age-matched subjects who had BC or CRC alone were used as control. Survival analysis using Kaplan-Meier method was performed.

RESULT

There were 63 double cancers [40 BC first (DBC): 23 CRC first (DCRC), mean age±SD 60.5±9.9 and 60.9±12.2 years] and 76 subjects in single cancer group [53 SBC: 23 SCRC, mean age 57.4±11.3 and 61.1±12.5 years]. The 5-year survival rate of the double cancer group was 74.6% and the single cancer group was 63.2%. D-group had slightly longer survival time than S-group (116.5±4.0 vs. 101.3±5.5, p=0.055). In D-group, the occurrence of addition of other primary cancers were more common (p=0.015). The second cancer occurred 61.7±45.3 months later in DBC group, and 39.1±26.6 months later in DCRC group (p=0.016). SCRC had shorter survival time vs. DCRC group (p=0.031). SBC and DBC had no different in mean survival time.

CONCLUSION

BC and CRC could occur as a part of multiple primary cancers. Detection of more than one cancer did not lead to decrease survival if the second cancer was early detected and treated. The occurrence of the second cancer might be beyond 5 years after the diagnosis of the first cancer. Thus, longer surveillance may be warranted. Awareness and provision of early screening should be offered to individuals diagnosed with either primary cancer. Detection of more than one cancer did not lead to shorter survival.

Pivotal Role of Genetic Counselors in the Uptake of Germline Genetic Testing in Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer and the Impact of Testing on Surgical Decision Making

BACKGROUND

Genetic testing is increasingly utilized in breast cancer patients; however, testing rates remain low. We aimed to evaluate the rate of genetic testing at a tertiary academic medical center utilizing a multidisciplinary clinic model including genetic counselor.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective chart review was performed on a cohort of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients from January 2018 through February 2019. Patients were reviewed for genetic screening eligibility, consultation with a genetic counselor, and test results.

RESULTS

Final analysis included 426 patients. 261 (61.3%) were found to meet National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for genetic testing, of which 178 patient (68.2%) underwent testing and 32 patients (12.3%) declined testing. Of the 165 not eligible for testing, 5 patients were tested. A total of 183 patients underwent testing and 116 (63.4%) had a negative result, 17 (9.3%) were positive for at least one gene mutation and 50 (27.3%) were identified to have a variant of unknown significance (VUS). There was a positive association between those patients who met with a genetic counselor and eligibility for testing (OR 31.1, 95% CI 16.0-60.5).

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic testing result has become an increasingly important factor when defining optimal surgical treatment for breast cancer patients. Increasing the availability of genetic consultation for breast cancer patients can improve testing rates and patient selection.

Experiences of genetic counselors in referring young and metastatic breast cancer patients to support services: A needs assessment

OBJECTIVE

Conduct a needs assessment to explore the experiences, barriers, and needs of genetic counselors (GCs), who counsel and refer young and metastatic breast cancer (BC) patients to support services, in order to develop resources to address any noticeable gaps.

METHODS

GCs providing care to BC patients were eligible to complete the survey. Support services were defined as resources to address patient-centered healthcare, emotional, and quality-of-life needs.

RESULTS

Most participants (n = 117) reported familiarity with cancer prevention services (93%); fewer were familiar with services secondary to a BC diagnosis (e.g., fatigue=16% and sexual health=24%). The volume of GCs indicating familiarity with support services increased significantly as work experience increased for seven services. Many (>50%) never referred patients to most (9/12) support services, excluding cancer prevention, mental health, and financial issues. Open-ended responses highlighted that GCs considered referrals to be outside their scope of practice or that healthcare systems prevent GCs from making referrals.

CONCLUSION

GCs may benefit from curated resources and materials, especially for support services secondary to a BC diagnosis, to better support their patients.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Collaboration of GCs with other health professionals through integrative care programs may decrease burdens to accessing support services.

Piloting a Spanish-Language Web-Based Tool for Hereditary Cancer Genetic Testing

The delivery of hereditary cancer pre-test education among Spanish-language patients is impeded by the dearth of Spanish-speaking genetic counselors. To address this gap, we evaluated a web-based genetic education tool delivered in Spanish to provide information typically discussed during an initial genetic counseling session. Spanish-speaking patients with a personal or family history of cancer were recruited at two centers in Puerto Rico and through social media. A total of 41 participants completed a survey before and after viewing the tool to measure knowledge, attitudes, and decisional empowerment. A subset of 10 participants completed a virtual semi-structured interview to assess the usability and appropriateness of the tool. Paired t-tests were calculated to evaluate changes in knowledge and attitudes. A McNemar test assessed for decisional empowerment. Interview transcripts were translated from Spanish to English and inductively coded and analyzed. Results revealed significant increases in knowledge (p < 0.001), while attitudes about genetic testing did not change (p = 0.77). The proportion of individuals who felt fully informed and empowered to decide about whether to undergo genetic testing increased from 15% to 51% (p < 0.001). Qualitative data indicated that participants found the tool easy to use with informative and valuable content. Our findings suggest this Spanish-language tool is a user-friendly and scalable solution to help inform and empower many individuals to decide about cancer genetic testing, recognizing that others may still benefit from genetic counseling prior to testing.

Disparity in Breast Cancer Care: Current State of Access to Screening, Genetic Testing, Oncofertility, and Reconstruction

Breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed in women, accounting for an estimated 30% of all new cancer diagnoses in women in 2022. Advances in breast cancer treatment have reduced the mortality rate over the past 25 years by up to 34% but not all groups have benefitted equally from these improvements. These disparities span the continuum of care from screening to the receipt of guideline-concordant therapy and survivorship. At the 2022 American College of Surgeons Clinical Congress, a panel session was dedicated to educating and discussing methods of addressing these disparities in a coordinated manner. While there are multilevel solutions to address these disparities, this article focuses on screening, genetic testing, reconstruction, and oncofertility.

Knowledge, Perception, and Skills, and Practices of Oncology Nurses in Cancer Survivorship Care: a Scoping Review

Survivorship care focuses on the well-being and quality of life of people affected by cancer. Oncology nurses play an essential role in survivorship care and must be equipped with the knowledge, skills, and competencies to provide survivorship care. This scoping review explored the existing literature on nurses' knowledge, perception, skills, or practices in delivering cancer survivorship care for adult cancer survivors. A scoping review was conducted through databases including PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycInfo in February 2022, following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. Fourteen original research studies were included. Most of the studies were conducted in the USA and targeted oncology registered nurses. The studies primarily focused on the knowledge (n = 2, 14.3%), perception of responsibility (n = 8, 57.1%), and practice (n = 9, 64.3%) regarding survivorship care among oncology nurses, reporting widely varied results. Nine studies reported perceived skills, practice, and perceived barriers as the most used outcome measurements, while two assessed nurses' cancer survivorship care knowledge. The main gaps were discrepancies between oncology nurses' perceptions of responsibility and practices in delivering survivorship care. Lack of time, knowledge, and skills were reported as significant factors impeding survivorship care provision among oncology nurses. Limited research shows a gap in integrating knowledge into survivorship care practices among oncology nurses. Further studies are needed to develop educational programs on survivorship care to support the integration of survivorship care into oncology nurses' practice.

The Risk of Breast Cancer between Western and Mediterranean Dietary Patterns

Breast cancer is a significant public health problem globally and prevention strategies have become of great interest as its incidence rises. Exploring the connection between dietary patterns and the reduction of breast cancer risk is considered a promising approach. High levels of fiber, phytochemicals, a good antioxidant profile, and a composition of advantageous fatty acids are characteristics of healthy dietary programs such as the Mediterranean diet. This review summarized and discussed the active compounds that are considered important in preventing breast cancer, including dietary components from recent related reports. These include polyunsaturated fatty acids, fiber, phytochemicals, and alcohol. Although the exact mechanism for preventing breast cancer using these dietary factors is not well understood, the combination of all the elements in a healthy diet plays a role in reducing breast cancer risk. Considering the elevated probability of breast cancer relapse and mortality, it is crucial to investigate the correlation between a nutritious dietary pattern and breast cancer, while identifying bioactive components that have the potential to mitigate the risk of breast cancer incidence.

Overview on population screening for carriers with germline BRCA mutation in China

Carriers with BRCA1/2 germline pathogenic variants are associated with a high risk of breast and ovarian cancers (also pancreatic and prostate cancers). While the spectrum on germline BRCA mutations among the Chinese population shows ethnic specificity, the identification of carriers with germline BRCA mutation before cancer onset is the most effective approach to protect them. This review focused on the current status of BRCA1/2 screening, the surveillance and prevention measures, and discussed the issues and potential impact of BRCA1/2 population screening in China. We conducted literature research on databases PubMed and Google Scholar, as well as Chinese databases CNKI and Wangfang Med Online database (up to 31 March 2022). Latest publications on germline BRCA1/2 prevalence, spectrum, genetic screening as well as carrier counseling, surveillance and prevention were captured where available. While overall 15,256 records were retrieved, 72 publications using germline BRCA1/2 testing were finally retained for further analyses. Germline BRCA1/2 mutations are common in Chinese patients with hereditary breast, ovarian, prostate and pancreatic cancers. Within previous studies, a unique BRCA mutation spectrum in China was revealed. Next-generation sequencing panel was considered as the most common method for BRCA1/2 screening. Regular surveillance and preventive surgeries were tailored to carriers with mutated-BRCA1/2. We recommend that all Chinese diagnosed with breast, ovarian, pancreatic or prostate cancers and also healthy family members, shall undergo BRCA1/2 gene test to provide risk assessment. Subsequently, timely preventive measures for mutation carriers are recommended after authentic genetic counseling.

Experiences of individuals with a variant of uncertain significance on genetic testing for hereditary cancer risks: a mixed method systematic review

The expansion of Multi-Gene Panel Testing (MGPT) has led to increased detection of variants of uncertain significance (VUS) among individuals with personal or family history of cancer. However, having a VUS result can impact on emotional and psychological wellbeing and cause challenges for non-geneticist healthcare providers. The purpose of this mixed methods systematic review was to examine what is currently known about the experiences of individuals with a VUS on genetic testing for inherited cancer susceptibility. The initial search was conducted in June 2020 using PUBMED, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PsychInfo according to the Joanna Briggs methodology for systematic reviews. A total of 18 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies included in this review identified a range of emotional reactions to a VUS result, a general lack of understanding of a VUS result and its implications, frustration with a lack of healthcare provider knowledge, and a need for clear communication with healthcare providers. This review identified critical gaps in current knowledge to guide genetic counseling praxis, specifically in the knowledge of communication patterns and methods of improving communication with healthcare providers and family members and preferred risk management strategies. This will help to improve the counseling process and the management of care during and after genetic testing.