Universal screening for Lynch syndrome among patients with colorectal cancer: patient perspectives on screening and sharing results with at-risk relatives

Universal screening of colorectal tumors for lynch syndrome: a survey of patient experiences and opinions

BACKGROUND

Lynch syndrome represents the most common hereditary cause of both colorectal and endometrial cancer. It is caused by defects in mismatch repair genes, as well as EPCAM. Universal screening of colon tumors for Lynch syndrome via microsatellite instability (MSI) and/or immunohistochemistry (IHC) can identify patients and families at risk to develop further cancers and potentially impact surveillance and treatment options. The approach to implementation of universal screening, taking ethical considerations into account, is critical to its effectiveness, with patient perspectives providing valuable insight.

METHODS

Patients whose colon tumors underwent universal screening at Penn State Hershey Medical Center over a period of 2.5 years were mailed a survey on universal screening in 2017. Along with the survey, they received a recruitment letter and a summary explanation of research. The survey included both multiple choice and free-response questions that covered topics including respondent knowledge of Lynch syndrome, attitudes toward universal screening and experiences with the screening protocol as implemented.

RESULTS

Sixty-six of 297 possible patients (22.2%) responded to the survey, including 13 whose screening results raised concern for Lynch syndrome. 75.8% of respondents supported universal tumor screening without informed consent. 92.4% preferred receiving screening results regardless of outcome. Respondents described benefits to screening for themselves and their families.

CONCLUSIONS

While broadly supporting universal tumor screening without informed consent, respondents also wanted more information shared about the screening policy, as well as their results. These patient preferences should be one of many factors considered when implementing universal screening and can also inform practices regarding both tumor profiling and universal genetic testing, which is becoming more prevalent.

"Go ahead and screen" - advice to healthcare systems for routine lynch syndrome screening from interviews with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common cause of inherited colorectal cancer (CRC). Universal tumor screening (UTS) of newly diagnosed CRC cases is recommended to aid in diagnosis of LS and reduce cancer-related morbidity and mortality. However, not all health systems have adopted UTS processes and implementation may be inconsistent due to system and patient-level complexities.

METHODS

To identify barriers, facilitators, and suggestions for improvements of the UTS process from the patient perspective, we conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with patients recently diagnosed with CRC, but not screened for or aware of LS. Patients were recruited from eight regionally diverse US health systems. Interviews were conducted by telephone, 60-minutes, audio-recorded, and transcribed. An inductive, constant comparative analysis approach was employed.  RESULTS: We completed 75 interviews across the eight systems. Most participants were white (79%), about half (52%) were men, and the mean age was 60 years. Most self-reported either no (60%) or minimal (40%) prior awareness of LS. Overall, 96% of patients stated UTS should be a routine standard of care for CRC tumors, consistently citing four primary motivations for wanting to know their LS status and engage in the process for LS identification: "knowledge is power"; "family knowledge"; "prevention and detection"; and "treatment and surveillance." Common concerns pertaining to the process of screening for and identifying LS included: creating anticipatory worry for patients, the potential cost and the accuracy of the genetic test, and possibly having one's health insurance coverage impacted by the LS diagnosis. Patients suggested health systems communicate LS results in-person or by phone from a trained expert in LS; offer proactive verbal and written education about LS, the screening steps, and any follow-up surveillance recommendations; and support patients in communicating their LS screening to any of their blood relatives.

CONCLUSION

Our qualitative findings demonstrate patients with CRC have a strong desire for healthcare systems to regularly implement and offer UTS. Patients offer key insights for health systems to guide future implementation and optimization of UTS and other LS screening programs and maximize diagnosis of individuals with LS and improve cancer-related surveillance and outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not available: not a clinical trial.

Young-onset colorectal cancer

In the past decades the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in people under the age of 50 years has increased, which is referred to as early-onset CRC or young-onset CRC (YO-CRC). YO-CRC is expected to account for 11% of colon cancers and 23% of rectal cancers by 2030. This trend is observed in different parts of the world and in both men and women. In 20% of patients with YO-CRC, a hereditary cancer syndrome is found as the underlying cause; however, in the majority of patients no genetic predisposition is present. Beginning in the 1950s, major changes in lifestyle such as antibiotic use, low physical activity and obesity have affected the gut microbiome and may be an important factor in YO-CRC development. Owing to a lack of screening, patients with YO-CRC are often diagnosed with advanced-stage disease. Long-term treatment-related complications should be taken into account in these younger patients, making the more traditional sequential approaches of drug therapy not always the most appropriate option. To better understand the underlying mechanism and define relationships between environmental factors and YO-CRC development, long-term prospective studies are needed with lifestyle data collected from childhood.

Patient navigation for hereditary colorectal cancer: Design of a randomized controlled trial to determine the effectiveness of pathways to genetic counseling

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of Lynch and other hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) syndromes through germline genetic testing has important implications for treatment and risk-management, yet guideline-recommended genetic counseling referral and attendance is suboptimal.

METHODS

Our team developed an adapted patient navigation program-Pathways to Genetic Counseling-to address multilevel barriers to genetic counseling referral and receipt. This paper describes the methods of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) testing Pathways to Genetic Counseling's effectiveness at increasing genetic counseling attendance in the University of Washington Medicine health system. We will identify CRC patients eligible for genetic counseling (diagnosed before age 50 or at any age with evidence of inherited mismatch repair deficiency) through a combination of structured electronic health record queries and manual chart review. Patients will be randomized 1:1 prior to consent and receive either care as usual (no contact) or be invited to participate in patient navigation. We will use chart review to compare rates of genetic counseling referral and attendance within six months of randomization, regardless of patients' engagement with navigation. We plan to identify and randomize 161 eligible CRC patients over a nine-month period beginning in late 2021.

DISCUSSION

Our pragmatic RCT design will provide real-world data on the potential for patient navigation to address longstanding care gaps in preventive genomic medicine. If effective, we hope to pilot Pathways to Genetic Counseling in additional settings with a long-term goal of improving appropriate diagnosis of hereditary CRC syndromes and subsequent cascade screening of eligible family members.

Retrospective assessment of barriers and access to genetic services for hereditary cancer syndromes in an integrated health care delivery system

Background

A critical step in access to genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes is referral for genetic counseling to assess personal and family risk. Individuals meeting testing guidelines have the greatest need to be evaluated. However, referrals to genetics are underutilized in US patients with hereditary cancer syndromes, especially within traditionally underserved populations, including racial and ethnic minorities, low-income, and non-English speaking patients.

Methods

We studied existing processes for referral to genetic evaluation and testing for hereditary cancer risk to identify areas of potential improvement in delivering these services, especially for traditionally underserved patients.

We conducted a retrospective review of 820 referrals to the Kaiser Permanente Northwest (KPNW) genetics department containing diagnosis codes for hereditary cancer risk. We classified referrals as high- or low-quality based on whether sufficient information was provided to determine if patients met national practice guidelines for testing. Through chart abstraction, we also assessed consistency with practice guidelines, whether the referral resulted in a visit to the genetics department for evaluation, and clinical characteristics of patients receiving genetic testing.

Results

Most referrals (n = 514, 63%) contained sufficient information to assess the appropriateness of referral; of those, 92% met practice guidelines for genetic testing. Half of referred patients (50%) were not offered genetic evaluation; only 31% received genetic testing. We identified several barriers to receiving genetic evaluation and testing, the biggest barrier being completion of a family history form sent to patients following the referral. Those with a referral consistent with testing guidelines, were more likely to receive genetic testing than those without (39% vs. 29%, respectively; p = 0.0058). Traditionally underserved patients were underrepresented in those receiving genetic evaluation and testing relative to the overall adult KPNW population.

Conclusions

Process improvements are needed to increase access to genetic services to diagnose hereditary cancer syndromes prior to development of cancer.

Effectiveness of patient-targeted interventions to inform decision making and improve uptake of colorectal cancer genetic evaluation for at-risk individuals: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Inherited colorectal cancer syndromes increase the risk of contracting colorectal and other cancers. International guidelines recommend the identification of individuals with hereditary colorectal cancer and the supervision of asymptomatic individuals with a family history. However, detection of hereditary colorectal cancer is suboptimal. The prevalence of genetic counselling and testing for individuals with high genetic risk is low.

OBJECTIVE

To identify, characterize and summarize patient-targeted interventions on improving the uptake of colorectal cancer genetic evaluation for at-risk individuals and enhancing their informed decision making.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Six electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane library) were searched to identify eligible clinical trials from each database's inception to March 25, 2020. The reference lists of the included studies and reviews were checked for additional articles.

REVIEW METHODS

Studies were screened and independently appraised by two reviewers using the standardized critical appraisal checklist for randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies from the Joanna Briggs Institute. The results were tabulated and reported in descriptive format.

RESULTS

Based on the inclusion criteria, 8 articles satisfied the inclusion criteria and were included. The studies examined patient-targeted intervention strategies related to risk assessment, education, and decision aids. Outcomes included (1) informed decisions regarding microsatellite instability testing, (2) informed decisions concerning genetic testing, (3) genetic counselling and testing. Most of the included studies revealed that interventions had positive effects on the uptake of colorectal cancer genetic evaluation for at-risk individuals and their informed decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

There were few studies included in this review, and the results were inconsistent. Based on this review, the conclusion cannot be made that interventions for risk assessment, education, and decision aids have positive effects on the uptake of colorectal cancer genetic evaluation for at-risk individuals and their informed decision making. However, to our knowledge, this is the first systematic review to summarize the effectiveness of patient-targeted interventions to inform decision making and improve uptake of colorectal cancer genetic evaluation for at-risk individuals. This review provides important evidence for related topics. Future studies with rigorous designs are recommended. Nurses have a crucial role in personalized health care. The involvement of nurses in collaboration with all the stakeholders in the development, implementation and evaluation of cancer genetic screening programs to improve genetic referral of individual at risk.

Comparison of universal screening in major lynch-associated tumors: a systematic review of literature

Lynch syndrome (LS) is associated with an increased lifetime risk of several cancers including colorectal (CRC), endometrial (EC), ovarian (OC), urinary (UT) and sebaceous tumors (ST). The benefit for universal screening in CRC and EC is well known. However, this benefit in other major lynch-associated tumors is unclear. We performed a systematic review of all published articles in the MEDLINE database between 2005 to 2017 to identify studies performing universal screening for LS in unselected CRC, EC, OC, UT and ST. All cases with MSI-H (instability in two or more markers) or missing one or more proteins on IHC testing were considered screening positive. Cases with MLH1 promoter hypermethylation or BRAF mutation positive were considered to have somatic mutations. A total of 3788 articles were identified in MEDLINE yielding 129 study arms from 113 studies. The overall pooled yield of universal LS screening and germline mismatch gene mutation was significantly different across the major LS-associated tumors (Mann Whitney test, p < 0.001). The pooled screening yield was highest in ST [52.5% (355/676), 95% CI 48.74-56.26%] followed by EC [22.65% (1142/5041), 95% CI 21.54-23.86%], CRC [11.9% (5649/47,545), 95% CI 11.61-12.19%], OC [11.29% (320/2833), 95% CI 10.13-12.47%] and UT [11.2% (31/276), 95% CI 7.48-14.92%]. ST also had the highest pooled germline positivity for mismatch repair gene mutation [18.8%, 33/176, 95%CI 13.03-24.57], followed by EC [2.6% (97/3765), 95% CI 2.09-3.11], CRC [1.8% (682/37,220), 95% CI 1.66-1.94%], UT [1.8%(3/164), 95% CI - 0.24-3.83%] and OC [0.83%(25/2983), 95% CI 0.48-1.12%]. LS screening in EC yielded significantly higher somatic mutations compared to CRC [pooled percentage 16.94% [(538/3176), 95%CI 15.60-18.20%] vs. 5.23% [(1639/26,152), 95% CI 4.93-5.47%], Mann Whitney test, p < 0.0001. Universal LS testing should be routinely performed in OC, UT and STs in addition to CRC and EC. Our findings also support consideration for IHC and somatic mutation testing before germline testing in EC due to higher prevalence of somatic mutations as well as germline testing in all patients with ST. Our results have implications for future design of LS screening programs and further studies are needed to assess the cost effectiveness and burden on genetic counselling services with expanded universal testing for LS.

Worldwide variation in lynch syndrome screening: case for universal screening in low colorectal cancer prevalence areas

To perform a systematic assessment of universal Lynch syndrome (LS) screening yield in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients around the world. Universal screening for LS is recommended in all CRC patients. However, the variation in yield of LS screening in the setting of significant global variation in CRC prevalence is unknown. A systematic review of articles in the MEDLINE database was performed to identify studies performing universal screening for LS. All cases with microsatellite instability (MSI-H) or missing one or more proteins on immunohistochemistry (IHC) were considered screening positive. The overall pooled yield of universal LS screening in 97 study arms from 89 identified studies was 11.9% (5649/47545) and the overall pooled percentage of confirmed LS patients was 1.8% (682/37220). LS screening positivity varied significantly based on geographic region (Kruskal Wallis test, p < 0.001) and reported 5-year CRC prevalence in the country (Fisher's exact, p < 0.001). Significant inverse correlation was found between LS screening positivity and 5-year CRC prevalence (Pearson correlation, r =  - 0.56, p < 0.001). The overall yield of LS screening was 15.00% (382/2553) and rate of confirmed LS was 7.7% (113/1475) in LS screening done in patients ≤ 50 years (16 studies). There is significant geographic variation in LS screening positivity with higher yield in countries with lower prevalence of CRC. Our results highlight the importance of universal LS screening in younger patients and low CRC prevalence countries.

Universal tumor screening for lynch syndrome: perspectives of patients regarding willingness and informed consent

Aim: Lynch Syndrome is associated with a significant risk of colorectal carcinoma (CRC) and other cancers. Universal tumor screening is a strategy to identify high-risk individuals by testing all CRC tumors for molecular features suggestive of Lynch Syndrome. Patient interest in screening and preferences for consent have been underexplored. Methods: A postal survey was administered to CRC patients in a Canadian province. Results: Most patients (81.4%) were willing to have tumors tested if universal tumor screening were available and were willing to discuss test results with family members and healthcare professionals. The majority (62.6%) preferred informed consent be obtained prior to screening. Conclusion: Patients were supportive of universal screening. They expected consent to be obtained, contrary to current practice across Canada and elsewhere.

Beyond the Variants: Mutational Patterns in Next-Generation Sequencing Data for Cancer Precision Medicine

Massively parallel sequencing, also referred to as “next-generation sequencing” (NGS) provides not only information about simple, single nucleotide alterations, but it can also provide information on complex variations, such as insertions and deletions, copy number alterations, and structural variants. In addition to identifying individual alterations, genome-wide biomarkers can be discerned from somatic cancer NGS data, broadly termed mutational patterns and signatures. This review will focus on several of the most common genome-wide biomarkers such as tumor mutational burden, microsatellite instability, homologous recombination deficiency, and mutational signatures.

Implementation of a Systematic Tumor Screening Program for Lynch Syndrome in an Integrated Health Care Setting

A subset of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases are attributable to Lynch syndrome (LS), a hereditary form of CRC. Effective evaluation for LS can be done on CRC tumors to guide diagnostic testing. Increased diagnosis of LS allows for surveillance and risk reduction, which can mitigate CRC-related burden and prevent cancer-related deaths. We evaluated participation in LS screening among newly diagnosed adult CRC patients. Some cases were referred for genetics evaluation prior to study recruitment (selective screening). Those not referred directly were randomized to the intervention or control (usual care) arms. Control cases were observed for one year, then given information about LS screening. Patients who declined participation were followed through the medical record. Of 601 cases of CRC, 194 (32%) enrolled in our study and were offered LS screening, 43 (7%) were followed as a control group, 148 (25%) declined participation and 216 (36%) were ineligible [63 (10%) of which received prior selective screening]. Six and nine cases of LS were identified through the intervention and selective screening groups, respectively. Overall, a higher proportion of PMS2 variants were identified in the intervention (3/6, 50%) versus selective screening groups (2/9, 22%) (not statistically significant). Eighty-eight percent and 23% of intervention and control patients, respectively, received LS screening. No control patients were found to have LS. Systems-based approaches are needed to ensure we fully identify LS cases. The proportion of LS cases from this program was 4% of newly diagnosed cases of CRC, similar to other programs.

Next-Generation Service Delivery: A Scoping Review of Patient Outcomes Associated with Alternative Models of Genetic Counseling and Genetic Testing for Hereditary Cancer

The combination of increased referral for genetic testing and the current shortage of genetic counselors has necessitated the development and implementation of alternative models of genetic counseling and testing for hereditary cancer assessment. The purpose of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the patient outcomes that are associated with alternative models of genetic testing and genetic counseling for hereditary cancer, including germline-only and tumor testing models. Seven databases were searched, selecting studies that were: (1) full-text articles published ≥2007 or conference abstracts published ≥2015, and (2) assessing patient outcomes of an alternative model of genetic counseling or testing. A total of 79 publications were included for review and synthesis. Data-charting was completed using a data-charting form that was developed by the study team for this review. Seven alternative models were identified, including four models that involved a genetic counselor: telephone, telegenic, group, and embedded genetic counseling models; and three models that did not: mainstreaming, direct, and tumor-first genetic testing models. Overall, these models may be an acceptable alternative to traditional models on knowledge, patient satisfaction, psychosocial measures, and the uptake of genetic testing; however, particular populations may be better served by traditional in-person genetic counseling. As precision medicine initiatives continue to advance, institutions should consider the implementation of new models of genetic service delivery, utilizing a model that will best serve the needs of their unique patient populations.