NSGC practice guideline: risk assessment and genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

Genetic risk assessment in breast and gynecologic malignancies- what's to know in 2024?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hereditary cancer risk assessment and counseling have become integral in oncology care, especially in breast and gynecologic malignancies where genetic test results impact management. However, a large number of patients who could benefit from genetic testing are not getting tested. As such, genetic risk assessment and counseling methods have had to evolve to meet the needs of this expanding patient population.

RECENT FINDINGS

"Mainstreaming" genetic testing is an initiative to incorporate genetic testing into routine cancer care in lieu of the traditional genetic counseling model to improve uptake of testing while minimizing expansion of genetic counselor and clinic resources. These models have performed well in various institutions demonstrating an improvement in clinical efficacy. However, missed opportunities from the preventive care standpoint, a core value of cancer genetics risk assessment, have become apparent. The focus of these models is on the patient's cancer diagnosis and comprehensive/familial genetic risk assessment is not often completed.

SUMMARY

Identifying patients at an increased risk of cancer, even in the absence of a hereditary cancer predisposition syndrome, is important in tailoring screening and preventive measures. As we look to the future, we need to critically approach mainstreaming and determine how to reincorporate comprehensive genetic risk assessment into our models.

How the other half screens: A model for partnerships between student-run free clinics and genetic counseling programs to address disparities in hereditary cancer evaluation

Genetic medicine is considered a major part of the future of preventative care, offering evidence-based, effective interventions to improve health outcomes and reduce morbidity and mortality, especially regarding hereditary cancer screening. Identification of individuals who would benefit from screening is key to improving their cancer-related healthcare outcomes. However, patients without insurance, of historically underserved races, of lower socioeconomic status, and in rural communities have lower access to such care. Barriers to access lead to populations having higher rates of undetected hereditary cancer, and consequently more severe forms of cancer. With an already-established reach, student-run free clinics can work with genetic counseling training programs to incorporate genetic medicine into their workflow. Such partnerships will (1) make genetic care more accessible with goals of improving patient morbidity, mortality, and health outcomes, (2) offer robust educational experiences for genetic counseling learners, particularly in understanding social determinants of health and barriers to care, and (3) actively combat the growing racial and geographic gaps in genetic care. Our study presents how one student-run free clinic implemented genetic counseling into its primary care workflow to improve access to genetics services. We present two examples of how genetic counseling improved patients' medical care. We also identify obstacles encountered during this program's development, as well as solutions-those we incorporated and possible considerations for other clinics. With the hope that other clinics can use this paper to design similar partnerships, we aim to lessen the gap between sickness and screening.

Shared Decision Making in the Care of Patients With Cancer

Shared decision making (SDM) is a method of care that is suitable for the care of patients with cancer. It involves a collaborative conversation seeking to respond sensibly to the problematic situation of the patient, cocreating a plan of care that makes sense intellectually, practically, and emotionally. Genetic testing to identify whether a patient has a hereditary cancer syndrome represents a prime example of the importance for SDM in oncology. SDM is important for genetic testing because not only results affect current cancer treatment, cancer surveillance, and care of relatives but also these tests generate both complex results and psychological concerns. SDM conversations should take place without interruptions, disruptions, or hurry and be supported, where available, by tools that assist in conveying the relevant evidence and in supporting plan development. Examples of these tools include treatment SDM encounter aids and the Genetics Adviser. Patients are expected to play a key role in making decisions and implementing plans of care, but several evolving challenges related to the unfettered access to information and expertise of varying trustworthiness and complexity in between interactions with clinicians can both support and complicate this role. SDM should result in a plan of care that is maximally responsive to the biology and biography of each patient, maximally supportive of each patient's goals and priorities, and minimally disruptive of their lives and loves.

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.

Examining interprofessional collaboration in oncogenetic service delivery models for hereditary cancers: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

In a context of limited genetic specialists, collaborative models have been proposed to ensure timely access to high quality oncogenetic services for individuals with inherited cancer susceptibility. Yet, extensive variability in the terminology used and lack of a clear understanding of how interprofessional collaboration is operationalised and evaluated currently constrains the development of a robust evidence base on the value of different approaches used to optimise access to these services. To fill in this knowledge gap, this scoping review aims to systematically unpack the nature and extent of collaboration proposed by these interventions, and synthesise the evidence available on their implementation, effectiveness and economic impact.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews, a comprehensive literature search will be conducted to identify peer-reviewed and grey literature on collaborative models used for adult patients with, or at increased risk of, hereditary breast, ovarian, colorectal and prostate cancers. An initial search was developed for Medline, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Cochrane and Web of Science on 13 June 2022 and will be complemented by searches in Google and relevant websites. Documents describing either the theory of change, planning, implementation and/or evaluation of these interventions will be considered for inclusion. Results will be summarised descriptively and used to compare relevant model characteristics and synthesise evidence available on their implementation, effectiveness and economic impact. This process is expected to guide the development of a definition and typology of collaborative models in oncogenetics that could help strengthen the knowledge base on these interventions. Moreover, because we will be mapping the existing evidence on collaborative models in oncogenetics, the proposed review will help us identify areas where additional research might be needed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This research does not require ethics approval. Results from this review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed articles and conferences.

Mother and Daughter Perspectives on Genetic Counseling and Testing of Adolescents for Hereditary Breast Cancer Risk

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the risks, benefits, and utility of testing for adult-onset hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) in adolescents and young adults.

STUDY DESIGN

We evaluated interest in genetic testing of adolescents for adult-onset HBOC genes through semistructured interviews with mothers and adolescents who had previously participated in breast cancer research or had pursued (mothers) clinical testing for HBOC.

RESULTS

The majority of mothers (73%) and daughters (75%) were interested in the daughter having genetic testing and were motivated by the future medical utility and current social utility of relieving anxiety and allowing them to prepare. Mothers and daughters both reported that approximately 3 years in the future was the best time to test the daughter regardless of the current age of the daughter. Overall, both mothers and daughters expressed the importance of the involvement of the mother to provide educational and emotional support but ultimately it was the daughter's decision to test. Balancing the independence and maturity of the daughter while reinforcing communication and support within the dyad was a prominent theme throughout the interviews.

CONCLUSIONS

There is interest among some high-risk adolescents and young adults to engage in genetic counseling and undergo testing. Providing pretest and posttest genetic counseling, assessing preferences for parent involvement, and offering psychosocial support may be important if genetic testing for HBOC is offered to adolescents and young adults before age 25 years.

Cancer Predisposition Genes in Adolescents and Young Adults (AYAs): a Review Paper from the Italian AYA Working Group

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The present narrative systematic review summarizes current knowledge on germline gene mutations predisposing to solid tumors in adolescents and young adults (AYAs).

RECENT FINDINGS

AYAs with cancer represent a particular group of patients with specific challenging characteristics and yet unmet needs. A significant percentage of AYA patients carry pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PV/LPVs) in cancer predisposition genes. Nevertheless, knowledge on spectrum, frequency, and clinical implications of germline variants in AYAs with solid tumors is limited. The identification of PV/LPV in AYA is especially critical given the need for appropriate communicative strategies, risk of second primary cancers, need for personalized long-term surveillance, potential reproductive implications, and cascade testing of at-risk family members. Moreover, these gene alterations may potentially provide novel biomarkers and therapeutic targets that are lacking in AYA patients. Among young adults with early-onset phenotypes of malignancies typically presenting at later ages, the increased prevalence of germline PV/LPVs supports a role for genetic counseling and testing irrespective of tumor type.

BRCA1/2 variants of unknown significance in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome: looking for the hidden meaning

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome is caused by germline mutations in BRCA1/2 genes. These genes are very large and their mutations are heterogeneous and scattered throughout the coding sequence. In addition to the above-mentioned mutations, variants of uncertain/unknown significance (VUSs) have been identified in BRCA genes, which make more difficult the clinical management of the patient and risk assessment. In the last decades, several laboratories have developed different databases that contain more than 2000 variants for the two genes and integrated strategies which include multifactorial prediction models based on direct and indirect genetic evidence, to classify the VUS and attribute them a clinical significance associated with a deleterious, high-low or neutral risk. This review provides a comprehensive overview of literature studies concerning the VUSs, in order to assess their impact on the population and provide new insight for the appropriate patient management in clinical practice.

Improving our model of cascade testing for hereditary cancer risk by leveraging patient peer support: a concept report

Consensus and evidence suggest that cascade testing is critical to achieve the promise of cancer genetic testing. However, barriers to cascade testing include effective family communication of genetic risk information and family members' ability to cope with genetic risk. These barriers are further complicated by the developmental needs of unaffected family members during critical windows for family communication and adaptation. Peer support could address these barriers. We provide two illustrative examples of ongoing BRCA1/2-related clinical trials that apply a peer support model to improve family communication and functioning. Peer support can augment currently available genetic services to facilitate adjustment to and effective use of cancer genetic risk information. Importantly, this scalable approach can address the presence of cancer risk within families across multiple developmental stages. This applies a family-centered perspective that accommodates all potentially at-risk relatives. This peer support model can be further applied to emerging topics in clinical genetics to expand reach and impact.

Development and early implementation of an Accessible, Relational, Inclusive and Actionable approach to genetic counseling: The ARIA model

OBJECTIVE

To describe the training and early implementation of the ARIA model of genetic counseling (Accessible, Relational, Inclusive, Actionable).

METHODS

As part of the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) study, an interdisciplinary workgroup developed the ARIA curriculum and trained genetic counselors to return exome sequencing results using the ARIA model.

CURRICULUM

The ARIA curriculum includes didactic elements, discussion, readings, role plays, and observations of usual care genetic counseling sessions. The ARIA model provides the skills and strategies needed for genetic counseling to be accessible to all patients, regardless of prior knowledge or literacy level; involves appropriate psychological and social counseling without overwhelming the patient with information; and leaves the patient with clear and actionable next steps.

CONCLUSION

With sufficient training and practice, the ARIA model appears to be feasible, with promise for ensuring that genetic counselors' communication is accessible, relational, inclusive and actionable for the diverse patients participating in genomic medicine.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

ARIA offers a coherent set of principles and strategies for effective communication with patients of all literacy levels and outlines specific techniques to practice and incorporate these skills into routine practice. The ARIA model could be integrated into genetic counseling training programs and practice, making genetic counseling more accessible and meaningful for all patients.

How patients deal with an ambiguous medical test: Decision-making after genetic testing

OBJECTIVE

We know little about how patients make decisions when they receive a variant of uncertain significance result (VUS) from genetic testing. The purpose of this study was to elucidate a model of patient-informed decision-making after receiving a VUS result.

METHODS

Using an adapted Mental Models Approach, we conducted semi-structured interviews with women who received a VUS result from genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer (N = 20) to explore factors they believed were relevant to their decision-making. Two coders used a coding scheme informed by experts in hereditary breast cancer to conduct analysis. Inter-coder reliability was α = .86.

RESULTS

Three overarching decision themes emerged from the interviews: managing ambiguity, medical risk management, and sharing results with others. While participants noted some difficulty understanding their result, genetic counselors' interpretations, psychosocial factors (e.g., risk perceptions), and competing extrinsic demands influenced their decisions.

CONCLUSION

Complex influences affect patient decision-making after a VUS result from genetic testing and may encourage health protective behavior.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Even patients who understand their test result could use support managing the ambiguity of their test result and sharing it with others.

Use of a Standardized Tool to Identify Women at Risk for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian

OBJECTIVE

To increase rates of identification and genetic counseling referral for women at risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC).

DESIGN

Evidence-based practice improvement initiative.

SETTING/LOCAL PROBLEM

Private suburban obstetric and gynecologic (OB/GYN) practice in Tennessee with no standardized process for HBOC risk assessment or referral to genetic services.

PARTICIPANTS

Provider-led women's health care teams delivering well-woman care for women ages 18 years and older.

INTERVENTION/MEASUREMENTS

We implemented the use of a standardized familial risk assessment tool and clinical decision-making algorithm. Preimplementation and postimplementation risk identification and genetic services referral rates were measured, as was clinicians' compliance with using the risk assessment tool. The aim of the initiative was to increase identification and referral rates by 25 percentage points.

RESULTS

Women at risk of HBOC in the postimplementation group were 25.9 times more likely to be identified as being at risk (OR = 25.88, 95% confidence interval [10.78, 62.14]) and 31.5 times more likely to be offered referral to genetic counseling (OR = 31.50, 95% CI [13.37, 74.22]) compared with those in the preimplementation group. Rates of risk identification and referral to genetic counseling for women at risk of HBOC improved by 58.2 and 69.3 percentage points, respectively, surpassing the aims of this initiative and showing statistical significance of p < .001 for both indices.

CONCLUSION

The use of a standardized risk assessment tool and process for HBOC risk identification and genetic referral resulted in a significant increase in the identification and referral of women at risk in this setting. Early identification of women with HBOC is a crucial first step in increasing the use of enhanced screening and interventions that can reduce HBOC-associated cancer morbidity and mortality.

Universal access to genetic counseling for women with epithelial ovarian cancer in Nova Scotia: Evaluating a new collaborative care model

Women with pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 have a significantly increased lifetime risk of breast and ovarian cancers. The availability of genetic testing to identify BRCA1/2 carriers is imperative to disease prevention and treatment. We evaluated the effectiveness of a new collaborative care model in Nova Scotia, involving the integration of genetic counselors into tumor board rounds, reduction in time allotted for initial genetic counseling appointments from 60 to 45 min, and a standardized dictation template, to increase referral rate for genetic counseling. We also assessed the study cohorts' preferences on timing for genetic testing. A retrospective chart review was performed on all women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) from 2012 to 2017 (N = 386). Pertinent clinical outcomes were categorized and wait times to different nodes of the clinical pathway assessed. A questionnaire was sent to this same cohort of women to identify preference for the timing of genetic testing (n = 103). The chi-square and Wilcoxon's rank-sum tests were used to compare demographic and clinical variables pre- and post-care model implementation. We identified a 48.2% (95% CI: 39.4-56.7, p < .001) increase in referral for genetic counseling following implementation of the new care model. Median time from diagnosis to referral decreased by 74.0 days (p < .001) and median time from referral to first appointment by 54.0 days (p < .001). 56.3% of women desired referral at the time of diagnosis. This care model for women newly diagnosed with EOC in Nova Scotia was successful in increasing referral rates for genetic counseling. Majority of women pursued genetic testing following and favored that referral for genetic counseling be made at the time of diagnosis, highlighting the importance for timely access.

A Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Consent for Genetic Testing Using an Oncologist- or Genetic Counselor-Mediated Model of Care

Simple Summary

Genetic testing for hereditary cancer risk is usually arranged by a genetic counselor after talking about possible risks and benefits. To increase access to genetic testing, oncologists have started to order genetic testing. This survey study compared patient outcomes following genetic testing ordered by a genetic counselor or an oncologist. Genetic counselor-mediated genetic testing was associated with higher patient knowledge, as well as higher experience and understanding of genetic testing. Differences were noted in the type of psychological concerns reported, with individuals having genetic counselor-mediated testing being more likely to express concerns about having a hereditary cancer predisposition and those having oncologist-mediated testing more likely to express concerns regarding general emotions. Overall, oncologist-mediated genetic testing appears to provide a streamlined alternative to genetic testing; however, all individuals may benefit from post-test genetic counseling to address any knowledge gaps and provide additional psychological support.

Abstract

This study compares knowledge, experience and understanding of genetic testing, and psychological outcomes among breast and ovarian cancer patients undergoing multi-gene panel testing via genetic counselor-mediated (GMT) or oncologist-mediated (OMT) testing models. A pragmatic, prospective survey of breast and ovarian cancer patients pursuing genetic testing between January 2017 and August 2019 was conducted at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto, Canada. A total of 120 (80 GMT; 40 OMT) individuals completed a survey administered one week following consent to genetic testing. Compared to OMT, the GMT cohort had higher median knowledge (8 vs. 9; p = 0.025) and experience/understanding scores (8.5 vs. 10; p < 0.001) at the time of genetic testing. Significant differences were noted in the potential psychological concerns experienced, with individuals in the GMT cohort more likely to screen positive in the hereditary predisposition domain of the Psychosocial Aspects of Hereditary Cancer tool (55% vs. 27.5%; p = 0.005), and individuals in the OMT cohort more likely to screen positive in the general emotions domain (65.0% vs. 38.8%; p = 0.007). The results of this study suggest that OMT can be implemented to streamline genetic testing; however, post-test genetic counseling should remain available to all individuals undergoing genetic testing, to ensure any psychologic concerns are addressed and that individuals have a clear understanding of relevant implications and limitations of their test results.

Risk assessment and genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndromes-Practice resource of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

Cancer risk assessment and genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) are a communication process to inform and prepare patients for genetic test results and the related medical management. An increasing number of healthcare providers are active in the delivery of cancer risk assessment and testing, which can have enormous benefits for enhanced patient care. However, genetics professionals remain key in the multidisciplinary care of at-risk patients and their families, given their training in facilitating patients' understanding of the role of genetics in cancer development, the potential psychological, social, and medical implications associated with cancer risk assessment and genetic testing. A collaborative partnership of non-genetics and genetics experts is the ideal approach to address the growing number of patients at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. The goal of this practice resource is to provide allied health professionals an understanding of the key components of risk assessment for HBOC as well as the use of risk models and published guidelines for medical management. We also highlight what patient types are appropriate for genetic testing, what are the most appropriate test(s) to consider, and when to refer individuals to a genetics professional. This practice resource is intended to serve as a resource for allied health professionals in determining their approach to delivering comprehensive care for families and individuals facing HBOC. The cancer risk and prevalence figures in this document are based on cisgender women and men; the risks for transgender or non-binary individuals have not been studied and therefore remain poorly understood.

Transition to telephone genetic counseling services during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly disrupted the delivery of healthcare services, including oncology. To ensure continuity of cancer genetic counseling at a large academic medical center while also promoting the safety of patients and staff, our team transitioned to fully remote telephone genetic counseling and testing services within 48 hr. We compare differences in the six weeks following the shift to telephone genetic counseling (post-COVID) to the six weeks preceding the pandemic (pre-COVID). We maintained 99% of our total visit capacity and saw a decrease in patient no-show rate from 9.5% to 7.3%. Of all patients who received telephone genetic counseling, fewer consented to genetic testing as compared to patients seen in-person prior to the pandemic (79% pre-COVID v. 72% post-COVID; p = .012). Four weeks after this cohort was closed for analysis, 96 out of 303 samples (32%) had not been received by the genetic testing laboratory, despite at least one reminder phone call to the patient. In 13 reported instances, a second sample was required (quality not sufficient, lost or mislabeled sample), thus delaying test results. We conclude that a rapid transition to remote genetic counseling and testing allowed uninterrupted access to cancer genetics services during to the COVID-19 pandemic. Patient compliance with sample return and higher rates of sample failure emerge as potential barriers to timely genetic testing under this service delivery model.

Organizational readiness to implement population-based screening and genetic service delivery for hereditary cancer prevention and control

Despite clinical guidelines, programs conducting population-based screening and genetic service delivery for hereditary cancer prevention and control are rare in practice. We interviewed individuals (n = 13) instrumental in implementing seven unique clinical programs conducting either universal tumor screening for Lynch Syndrome or routine family history screening and provision of genetic services for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in the United States. To characterize determinants of readiness to implement population-based cancer genetic service delivery models, interviews and deductive codes drew on Weiner's theory of organizational readiness for change. Qualitative analysis identified themes across programs. The degree to which organizational stakeholders valued moving to a population-based genetic service delivery model depended on the existence of aligned clinical guidelines at the time of program implementation. However, judgments of implementation capacity within the organization, particularly with respect to task demands and resource concerns, were more often barriers to readiness. Program champions were essential to facilitating readiness, frequently taking on substantial uncompensated work. These data suggest that developing interventions targeting change efficacy and cultivating practice change champions may be two promising ways to increase uptake of population-based hereditary cancer screening and genetic service delivery in clinical practice.

Genetic Counselor and Healthcare Interpreter Perspectives on the Role of Interpreters in Cancer Genetic Counseling

Cancer genetic counseling (CGC) combines psychosocial counseling and genetic education provided by genetic counselors to patients and families who have a history of cancer and are considering or have undergone genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes. The quantity and complexity of information provided can be challenging for any patient, but is even more so for those with limited English proficiency (LEP). This exploratory study investigated healthcare interpreters' and genetic counselors' perspectives on the role of interpreters in providing care to LEP patients during CGC. Through a survey of 18 interpreters and conventional content analysis of semi-structured interviews with 11 interpreters and 10 GCs at two California public hospitals, we found that: 1) interpreters viewed their role as patient advocate, cultural broker, and emotional support, not simply a conduit; 2) interpreters were challenged by remote interpretation, lack of genetic knowledge, and the emotional content of encounters; 3) interpreters and GCs held conflicting views of the value of counselors' limited Spanish knowledge; and 4) trust, the foundation of the interpreter-provider dyad, was often lacking. The challenges identified here may result in poor healthcare experiences and outcomes for LEP patients. As genomics becomes more widespread and more LEP patients encounter CGC, the role of healthcare interpreters in facilitating effective communication must be further defined in order to facilitate better working relationships between interpreters and genetic counselors, and optimal communication experiences for patients.

Pharmacogenomic Testing: Clinical Evidence and Implementation Challenges

Pharmacogenomics can enhance patient care by enabling treatments tailored to genetic make-up and lowering risk of serious adverse events. As of June 2019, there are 132 pharmacogenomic dosing guidelines for 99 drugs and pharmacogenomic information is included in 309 medication labels. Recently, the technology for identifying individual-specific genetic variants (genotyping) has become more accessible. Next generation sequencing (NGS) is a cost-effective option for genotyping patients at many pharmacogenomic loci simultaneously, and guidelines for implementation of these data are available from organizations such as the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) and the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG). NGS and related technologies are increasing knowledge in the research sphere, yet rates of genomic literacy remain low, resulting in a widening gap in knowledge translation to the patient. Multidisciplinary teams—including physicians, nurses, genetic counsellors, and pharmacists—will need to combine their expertise to deliver optimal pharmacogenomically-informed care.

Development and testing of the KnowGene scale to assess general cancer genetic knowledge related to multigene panel testing

PURPOSE

To develop and evaluate a measure of cancer genetics knowledge relevant to multigene panel testing.

METHODS

The instrument was developed using systematic input from a national panel of genetics experts, acceptability evaluation by patient advocates, and cognitive testing. Twenty-four candidate items were completed by 591 breast or gynecological patients who had undergone genetic counseling and multigene panel testing in the past 18 months. A unidimensional item response theory model was fit with a mix of 2-parameter logistic nested response (2 plnrm) and 2-parameter logistic (2 pl) items.

RESULTS

Key domains addressing cancer genetics knowledge were found to be overlapping. Of the 24 candidate items, 8 items were removed due to poor discrimination or local dependence. The remaining 16 items had good fit (RMSEA = 0.045, CFI = 0.946) and discrimination parameters ranging from 0.49 to 1.60. The items specified as 2 plnrm distinguish between those answering incorrect versus don't know, with discrimination ranging from 0.51 to 1.02. Information curves were highest among those with lower knowledge.

CONCLUSION

KnowGene is a rigorously developed and effective measure of knowledge after cancer genetic counseling and multigene panel testing.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Measuring knowledge in a systematic way will inform practice and research initiatives in cancer genetics.

Evaluating BRCA mutation risk predictive models in a Chinese cohort in Taiwan

Accurate estimation of carrier probabilities of cancer susceptibility gene mutations is an important part of pre-test genetic counselling. Many predictive models are available but their applicability in the Asian population is uncertain. We evaluated the performance of five BRCA mutation risk predictive models in a Chinese cohort of 647 women, who underwent germline DNA sequencing of a cancer susceptibility gene panel. Using areas under the curve (AUCs) on receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves as performance measures, the models did comparably well as in western cohorts (BOADICEA 0.75, BRCAPRO 0.73, Penn II 0.69, Myriad 0.68). For unaffected women with family history of breast or ovarian cancer (n = 144), BOADICEA, BRCAPRO, and Tyrer-Cuzick models had excellent performance (AUC 0.93, 0.92, and 0.92, respectively). For women with both personal and family history of breast or ovarian cancer (n = 241), all models performed fairly well (BOADICEA 0.79, BRCAPRO 0.79, Penn II 0.75, Myriad 0.70). For women with personal history of breast or ovarian cancer but no family history (n = 262), most models did poorly. Between the two well-performed models, BOADICEA underestimated mutation risks while BRCAPRO overestimated mutation risks (expected/observed ratio 0.67 and 2.34, respectively). Among 424 women with personal history of breast cancer and available tumor ER/PR/HER2 data, the predictive models performed better for women with triple negative breast cancer (AUC 0.74 to 0.80) than for women with luminal or HER2 overexpressed breast cancer (AUC 0.63 to 0.69). However, incorporating ER/PR/HER2 status into the BOADICEA model calculation did not improve its predictive accuracy.

Multi gene panel testing for hereditary breast cancer - is it ready to be used?

Breast cancer is one of the most common malignancies and the leading cause of death among women worldwide. About 20% of breast cancers are hereditary. Approximately 30% of the mutations have remained negative after testing BRCA1/2 even in families with a Mendelian inheritance pattern for breast cancer. Additional non-BRCA genes have been identified as predisposing for breast cancer. Multi gene panel testing tries to cover and explain the BRCA negative inherited breast cancer, improving efficiency, speed and costs of the breast cancer screening. We identified 23 studies reporting results from individuals who have undergone multi gene panel testing for hereditary breast cancer and noticed a prevalence of 1-12% of non-BRCA genes, but also a high level of variants of uncertain significance. A result with a high level of variants of uncertain significance is likely to be more costly than bring benefits, as well as increase the anxiety for patients. Regarding further development of multi gene panel testing, more research is required to establish both the optimal care of patients with cancer (specific treatments like PARP inhibitors) and the management of unaffected individuals (chemoprevention and/or prophylactic surgeries). Early detection in these patients as well as prophylactic measures will significantly increase the chance of survival. Therefore, multi gene panel testing is not yet ready to be used outside clear guidelines. In conclusion, studies on additional cohorts will be needed to better define the real prevalence, penetrance and the variants of these genes, as well as to describe clear evidence-based guidelines for these patients.

Risk perception and screening behavior of Filipino women at risk for breast cancer: implications for cancer genetic counseling

The burden and experiences that come with a breast cancer diagnosis in a family impact how women perceive personal cancer risk and pursue preventive strategies and/or early detection screening. Hence, this study sought to understand how Filipino women incorporate their experiences living with a sister diagnosed with early-onset breast cancer to their personal perceived risk and screening behavior. Guided by phenomenological approach of inquiry, a face-to-face, semi-structured interview was conducted with 12 purposively sampled women with a female sibling diagnosed with breast cancer before age 50. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results revealed that the respondents tend to compare themselves with their sister when constructing views of personal cancer vulnerability. The subjective risk is also shaped by their beliefs regarding cancer causation such as personalistic causes, personal theory of inheritance, and locus of control. Their sisters' cancer diagnoses serve as a motivation for them to perform breast self-examination. However, clinical breast examination and screening mammography are underutilized due to perceived barriers such as difficulty allotting time to medical consultation, fear, and lack of finances. Overall, cancer risk perception and screening behavior are important factors that must be addressed during cancer genetic counseling consultations. Better understanding of these factors will aid in the formulation of an effective management plan for at-risk women.

BRCA mutation testing for ovarian cancer in the context of available targeted therapy: Survey and consensus of Hong Kong specialists

AIMS

BRCA mutation (BRCAmut) testing is an important tool for the risk assessment, prevention and early diagnosis of breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC), and more recently, for determining patient susceptibility to targeted therapy. This study assessed the current BRCAmut testing patterns and explored physicians' perspectives on the utilities and optimal sequencing of the testing, in order to facilitate and standardize testing practices.

METHODS

Medical specialists in BC and OC in Hong Kong were invited to complete a questionnaire on BRCAmut testing practices. A panel of specialists with extensive BRCAmut testing experience was also convened to develop consensus statements on testing, using the Delphi method and an anonymous electronic voting system.

RESULTS

The survey respondents (n = 71) recognized family history (FH) of BC and/or OC and an early age of onset as key factors for referring BRCAmut testing. The proportion of respondents who would test all OCs regardless of FH or age, as per the recent international guideline, was low (28.2%). The largest hurdles to testing were the cost, as well as the availability of next-generation sequencing-accredited testing and genetic counseling facilities. The panelists suggested that the sequence of somatic testing followed by germline testing may help address both the imminent need of treatment planning and longer term hereditary implications. The potential emotional and financial burdens of BRCAmut testing should be weighed against the potential therapeutic benefits, and the type and timing of testing personalized.

CONCLUSIONS

Accessibility of BRCAmut testing to all at-risk individuals will be achievable through improvements in testing affordability, as well as widened availability of accredited testing and genetic counseling facilities.

Canadian genetic healthcare professionals' attitudes towards discussing private pay options with patients

Background

Just as there is inconsistency with respect to coverage of genomic testing with insurance carriers, there is interprovincial discrepancy in Canada. Consequently, the option of private pay (e.g., self pay) arises, which can lead to inequities in access, particularly when patients may not be aware of this option. There are currently no published data regarding how the Canadian genetics community handles discussions of private pay options with patients. The purpose of this study was to assess the attitudes of genetic healthcare professionals (GHPs: medical geneticists, genetic counselors, and genetic nurses) practicing in Canada toward these discussions.

Methods

An online survey was distributed to members of the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists and the Canadian Association of Genetic Counsellors to assess frequencies, rationale, and ethical considerations regarding these conversations. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results

Of 144 respondents, 95% reported discussing private pay and 65% reported working in a clinic without a policy on this issue. There were geographic and practice‐specific differences. The most common circumstance for these discussions was when a test was clinically indicated (e.g., but funding was denied) followed by when the patient initiated the conversation. The most frequently discussed tests included: multi‐gene panels (73% of respondents), noninvasive prenatal testing (62%), and pre‐implantation genetic diagnosis (58%). Although 65% felt it was ethical to discuss private pay, 35% indicated it was “sometimes” ethical.

Conclusion

With the increasing availability of genomic technologies, these findings inform how we practice and demonstrate the need for policy in this area.

Evaluating the role of public health in implementation of genomics-related recommendations: a case study of hereditary cancers using the CDC Science Impact Framework

Public health plays an important role in ensuring access to interventions that can prevent disease, including the implementation of evidence-based genomic recommendations. We used the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Science Impact Framework to trace the impact of public health activities and partnerships on the implementation of the 2009 Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Lynch Syndrome screening recommendation and the 2005 and 2013 United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing recommendations.The EGAPP and USPSTF recommendations have each been cited by >300 peer-reviewed publications. CDC funds selected states to build capacity to integrate these recommendations into public health programs, through education, policy, surveillance, and partnerships. Most state cancer control plans include genomics-related goals, objectives, or strategies. Since the EGAPP recommendation, major public and private payers now provide coverage for Lynch Syndrome screening for all newly diagnosed colorectal cancers. National guidelines and initiatives, including Healthy People 2020, included similar recommendations and cited the EGAPP and USPSTF recommendations. However, disparities in implementation based on race, ethnicity, and rural residence remain challenges. Public health achievements in promoting the evidence-based use of genomics for the prevention of hereditary cancers can inform future applications of genomics in public health.

Hysterectomy at the time of risk-reducing surgery in BRCA carriers

In this study, women at risk for BRCA were surveyed to understand their choice of prophylactic surgery and associated risk of uterine cancers. The study was conducted as an anonymous online web-based survey that assessed personal and family histories and choice of prophylactic surgery. Respondents were targeted through social media groups that bring awareness to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. The study cohort included an international group of 601 respondents. The majority were female (99.3%), in their 40s (34.2%), and had completed college or graduate school (68.8%). 87% of respondents carry BRCA gene mutation. Of 339 respondents who underwent risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO), 55.8% had a hysterectomy at time of RRSO. Most common reasons for hysterectomy at time of RRSO included: 39% provider recommendation, 27.6% personal desire, 9.7% benign indications, 1.6% cancer in uterus, 1.1% precancerous uterine lesion, and 21.1% other (N = 185). In this cohort, nine were diagnosed with uterine cancer. Three were diagnosed after risk-reducing surgery. Both patients with uterine serous carcinoma were BRCA1 carriers. Two thirds of BRCA carriers surveyed had undergone RRSO. Of these, more than half had hysterectomy at time of RRSO. One third chose to have hysterectomy based on surgeon recommendation. <1% (2 out of 258) of BRCA1 gene mutation carriers reported being diagnosed with uterine serous carcinomas. While this incidence is low, it may be an underestimate based on the limitations of this study. Additional studies are needed to select which patients will benefit from concurrent hysterectomy and RRSO.

Evolution of genetic assessment for BRCA-associated gynaecologic malignancies: a Canadian multisociety roadmap

The landscape of genetic testing in ovarian cancer patients has changed dramatically in recent years. The therapeutic benefits of poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in treatment of BRCA1/2-related ovarian cancers has resulted in an increased demand and urgency for genetic testing results, while technological developments have led to widespread use of multi-gene cancer panels and development of tumour testing protocols. Traditional genetic counselling models are no longer sustainable and must evolve to match the rapid evolution of genetic testing technologies and developments in personalized medicine. Recently, representatives from oncology, clinical genetics, molecular genetics, pathology, and patient advocacy came together to create a national multi-disciplinary Canadian consortium. By aligning stakeholder interests, the BRCA Testing to Treatment (BRCA TtoT) Community of Practice aims to develop a national strategy for tumour and germline BRCA1/2 testing and genetic counselling in women with ovarian cancer. This article serves to provide an overview of the recent evolution of genetic assessment for BRCA1/2-associated gynecologic malignancies and outline a Canadian roadmap to facilitate change, improve genetic testing rates, and ultimately improve outcomes for hereditary ovarian cancer patients and their families.

Finding a Balance: Reconciling the Needs of the Institution, Patient, and Genetic Counselor for Optimal Resource Utilization

The current practice of cancer genetic counseling is undergoing widespread change and scrutiny. While there are clinical resources for genetic counselors (GCs) regarding the delivery of cancer genetic services, there is limited literature regarding effective management of a genetic counseling clinical program. We have developed administrative tools to manage a large team of GCs at a single academic medical center over a period of increasing demand for genetics services, with the initial aim of decreasing wait time for urgent genetic counseling visits. Here, we describe the three main elements of the clinical operations: Balancing patient volume between GCs, scheduling tracks for both routine and urgent appointments, and a team of triaging GCs to ensure appropriate patient referrals. For each of these elements, we describe how they have been modified over time and present data to support the utility of these strategies. The preliminary evidence offered here suggests that these tools allow for an equitable distribution of patient volume between team members, as well as the timely and accurate scheduling of urgent patients. As a result of the experiences presented here, other genetic counseling programs grappling with similar issues should be aware that it is possible to shift clinical operations to serve certain patient populations in a more timely fashion while keeping both providers and GC staff satisfied.

Inequities in genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer: implications for public health practice

The Ontario Breast Screening Program for women with a genetic predisposition to breast cancer is one of the first international models of a government-funded public health service that offers systematic genetic screening to women at a high risk of breast cancer. However, since the implementation of the program in 2011, enrolment rates have been lower than anticipated. Whilst there may be several reasons for this to happen, it does call into consideration the 'inverse equity law', whereby the more advantaged in society are the first to participate and benefit from universal health services. An outcome of this phenomenon is an increase in the health divide between those that are at a social advantage versus those that are not. Using an intersectionality lens, this paper explores the role of the social determinants of health and social identity in creating possible barriers in the access to genetic screening for hereditary breast cancer, and the implications for public health practice in recognising and ameliorating these differences.

Breadth of Genetic Testing Selected by Patients at Risk of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of patients at risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome to select the extent of genetic testing personally preferred and the impact of demographic factors on the breadth of testing pursued.

METHODS

A single-institution cohort was enumerated consisting of patients referred for clinical genetic counseling secondary to risk of HBOC syndrome. This was a retrospective study of consecutive patients seen for genetic counseling; all patients completed an epidemiologic questionnaire and provided personal and family medical histories. Patients meeting guidelines for testing were offered testing at 3 levels: single gene/condition (Single), small panels with highly penetrant genes (Plus), and large panels with high and moderately penetrant genes (Next). Associations between personal or family-related factors and breadth of testing selected were investigated. Continuous and categorical variables were compared using Student t and χ tests, as appropriate. Joint classification tables were used to test for effect modification, and a log-binomial model was used to compute rate ratios (RR) with a threshold of P < 0.05 considered significant.

RESULTS

We identified 253 patients who underwent genetic counseling for HBOC syndrome. Most patients were personally affected by cancer (63.6%), reported at least some college (79.2%), met the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for BRCA testing (94.5%), and opted to undergo genetic testing (94.1%). Most (84.9%) patients opted for panel testing. An increased likelihood of choosing Next-level testing was found to be associated with patients having any college experience (RR, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-2.30), as well as being unaffected by cancer (RR, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.64).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical genetic counseling is a highly specialized service, which should be provided to patients at risk of hereditary cancer syndromes. Although some epidemiologic factors can predict a patient's preference for testing breadth, patients were sufficiently able to self-identify the level of testing they were comfortable with after receiving genetic counseling. Most practitioners do not have the time or expertise to provide the degree of counseling needed to enable and empower patients to choose the level of testing they are comfortable with. When available, referral to genetic counselors remains an important component of comprehensive care for women with a personal or family history of cancer suggestive of hereditary risk.

Maternal perceptions of BRCA genetic counseling communication processes about disclosing cancer risk information to children and adult relatives

OBJECTIVES

Using a novel measure, examine maternal perceptions of the process by which issues pertaining to family communication of BRCA test results are addressed during cancer genetic counseling.

METHODS

After receiving BRCA results, mothers (N = 211) of minor-age children reported on their counseling experiences with providers using a communication process measure as well as other psychosocial variables.

RESULTS

The novel Genetic Counseling Communication Process measure demonstrated good internal consistency of its 2 factors: patient-led communication (Cronbach's α = 0.73) and provider-led communication (Cronbach's α = 0.82). Participants most often reported that discussions about family communication of BRCA test results to children and adult relatives were led only by their providers (38.2%-39.2%), as opposed to being led by the patient, both parties, or neither party. Providers were most likely to lead these discussions when mothers had stronger family histories of cancer and expressed more confidence about making a decision to talk to their children about BRCA. However, mothers typically led such discussions if they were raising older children and held more positive attitudes about pediatric BRCA testing.

CONCLUSIONS

When the assessment of BRCA genetic counseling outcomes includes family communication to potentially at-risk relatives, we learned that most but not all sessions addressed this topic. Cancer family history, child age, and maternal attitudes are important co-factors in these patient-provider communication exchanges. Providers delivering BRCA genetic counseling should be attentive to mothers' information and support needs regarding communicating cancer genetic test results to at-risk relatives, including children.

A Two-Phase Approach to Developing SNAP: an iPhone Application to Support Appointment Scheduling and Management for Women with a BRCA Mutation

Professional organizations provide surveillance guidelines for BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) carriers with intact breasts and/or ovaries to facilitate early cancer detection. However, literature indicates adherence to surveillance guidelines is inconsistent at best. Using the Messaging Model for Health Communication Campaigns framework, we undertook a two-phase formative research approach to develop an intervention to promote adherence to surveillance guidelines. Discussion groups identified preferred intervention format and function in phase I. Findings indicated carriers desired a phone application (app) to assist with surveillance management and appointment tracking. Thus, an iPhone app for carriers to track appointments based on published surveillance guidelines was developed. In phase II, we obtained feedback from BRCA carriers via a survey during a prototype demonstration at a regional conference. Participants in phase II wanted reminder capabilities and the ability to add and modify information fields. This feedback informed intervention modifications, resulting in the Scheduling Necessary Advised Procedures (SNAP) iPhone app currently being pilot tested by BRCA carriers throughout the USA.

Genetic Testing for Hereditary Breast Cancer: The Decision to Decline

Genetic testing is important for comprehensive cancer care. Commercial analysis of the BRCA1/2 genes has been available since 1996, and testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome is well established. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines identify individuals for whom BRCA1/2 analysis is appropriate and define management recommendations for mutation carriers. Despite recommendations, not all who meet NCCN criteria undergo genetic testing. We assess the frequency that individuals meeting NCCN criteria decline BRCA1/2 analysis, as well as factors that affect the decision-making process. A retrospective chart review was performed from September 2013 through August 2014 of individuals who received genetic counseling at the Levine Cancer Institute. A total of 1082 individuals identified through the retrospective chart review met NCCN criteria for BRCA1/2 analysis. Of these, 267 (24.7%) did not pursue genetic testing. Of the Nontested cohort, 59 (22.1%) were disinterested in testing and 108 (40.4%) were advised to gather additional genetic or medical information about their relatives before testing. The remaining 100 (37.5%) individuals were insured and desired to undergo genetic testing but were prohibited by the expense. Eighty five of these 100 patients were responsible for the total cost of the test, whereas the remaining 15 faced a prohibitive copay expense. Financial concerns are a major deterrent to the pursuit of BRCA1/2 analysis among those who meet NCNN criteria, especially in patients diagnosed with breast or ovarian cancer. These findings highlight the need to address financial concerns for genetic testing in this high-risk population.

The Three-Generation Pedigree: A Critical Tool in Cancer Genetics Care

The family history, a rather low-tech tool, is the backbone of genetic assessment and guides risk assessment and genetic testing decisions. The importance of the pedigree and its application to genetic practice is often overlooked and underestimated. Unfortunately, particularly with electronic health records, standard pedigrees are not routinely constructed. A clear understanding of how pedigrees are employed in clinical oncology practice may lead to improved collection and use of family history data.
.

Genetic Testing: Challenges and Changes in Testing for Hereditary Cancer Syndromes

BACKGROUND

The practice of genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes has changed dramatically in recent years, and patients often approach oncology nurses requesting information about genetic testing.
.

OBJECTIVES

This article aims to explore changes in cancer genetics, the role of genetics professionals in providing comprehensive genetic care, and the implications of these new developments in genetics for oncology nurses.
.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted and focused on articles about the updating of genetic tests with panel testing, insurance changes, alternative genetic counseling strategies, and direct-to-consumer genetic testing.
.

FINDINGS

Oncology nurses play an important role in identifying and referring patients, including those who have tested negative for hereditary susceptibility genes, to genetics professionals. Genetics professionals can assist with insurance issues, interpretation of test results, clarification when a variant of unknown clinical significance is detected, and recommendations for care based on personal and family history and testing results. Oncology nurses can assist families with understanding the limitations of direct-to-consumer genetic testing.

Trends in utilization and costs of BRCA testing among women aged 18-64 years in the United States, 2003-2014

PurposeWe examined 12-year trends in BRCA testing rates and costs in the context of clinical guidelines, national policies, and other factors.MethodsWe estimated trends in BRCA testing rates and costs from 2003 to 2014 for women aged 18-64 years using private claims data and publicly reported revenues from the primary BRCA testing provider.ResultsThe percentage of women with zero out-of-pocket payments for BRCA testing increased during 2013-2014, after 7 years of general decline, coinciding with a clarification of Affordable Care Act coverage of BRCA genetic testing. Beginning in 2007, family history accounted for an increasing proportion of women with BRCA tests compared with personal history, coinciding with BRCA testing guidelines for primary care settings and direct-to-consumer advertising campaigns. During 2013-2014, BRCA testing rates based on claims grew at a faster rate than revenues, following 3 years of similar growth, consistent with increased marketplace competition. In 2013, BRCA testing rates based on claims increased 57%, compared with 11% average annual increases over the preceding 3 years, coinciding with celebrity publicity.ConclusionThe observed trends in BRCA testing rates and costs are consistent with possible effects of several factors, including the Affordable Care Act, clinical guidelines and celebrity publicity.

Referral to cancer genetic counseling: do migrant status and patients' educational background matter?

Participation rates in cancer genetic counseling differ among populations, as patients with a lower educational background and migrant patients seem to have poorer access to it. We conducted a study to determine the present-day educational level and migrant status of counselees referred to cancer genetic counseling. We assessed personal characteristics and demographics of 731 newly referred counselees. Descriptive statistics were used to describe these characteristics. The results show that about 40% of the counselees had a high educational level and 89% were Dutch natives. Compared to the Dutch population, we found a significant difference in educational level (p = < 0.01) and migrant status (p = < 0.001). This suggests disparities in cancer genetic counseling and as a result of that, suboptimal care for vulnerable groups. Limited health literacy is likely to pose a particular challenge to cancer genetic counseling for counselees with a lower education or a migrant background. Our study points to considerable scope for improvement in referring vulnerable groups of patients for cancer genetic counseling.

Randomized Noninferiority Trial of Telephone vs In-Person Genetic Counseling for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer: A 12-Month Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Telephone delivery of genetic counseling is an alternative to in-person genetic counseling because it may extend the reach of genetic counseling. Previous reports have established the noninferiority of telephone counseling on short-term psychosocial and decision-making outcomes. Here we examine the long-term impact of telephone counseling (TC) vs in-person counseling (usual care [UC]).

METHODS

We recruited high-risk women for a noninferiority trial comparing TC with UC. Of 1057 potentially eligible women, 669 were randomly assigned to TC (n = 335) or UC (n = 334), and 512 completed the 12-month follow-up. Primary outcomes were patient-reported satisfaction with genetic testing decision, distress, and quality of life. Secondary outcomes were uptake of cancer risk management strategies.

RESULTS

TC was noninferior to UC on all primary outcomes. Satisfaction with decision (d = 0.13, lower bound of 97.5% confidence interval [CI] = -0.34) did not cross its one-point noninferiority limit, cancer-specific distress (d = -2.10, upper bound of 97.5% CI = -0.07) did not cross its four-point noninferiority limit, and genetic testing distress (d = -0.27, upper bound of 97.5% CI = 1.46), physical function (d = 0.44, lower bound of 97.5% CI = -0.91) and mental function (d = -0.04, lower bound of 97.5% CI = -1.44) did not cross their 2.5-point noninferiority limit. Bivariate analyses showed no differences in risk-reducing mastectomy or oophorectomy across groups; however, when combined, TC had significantly more risk-reducing surgeries than UC (17.8% vs 10.5%; χ2 = 4.43, P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings support telephone delivery of genetic counseling to extend the accessibility of this service without long-term adverse outcomes.

BRCA mutation in ovarian cancer: testing, implications and treatment considerations

Ovarian cancer is a heterogeneous disease that encompasses a number of different cellular subtypes, the most common of which is high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). Still today, ovarian cancer is primarily treated with chemotherapy and surgery. Recent advances in the hereditary understanding of this disease have shown a significant role for the BRCA gene. While only a minority of patients with HGSOC will have a germline BRCA mutation, many others may have tumor genetic aberrations within BRCA or other homologous recombination proteins. Genetic screening for these BRCA mutations has allowed improved preventative measures and therapeutic development. This review focuses on the understanding of BRCA mutations and their relationship with ovarian cancer development, as well as future therapeutic targets.

The Genetics Journey: A Case Report of a Genetic Diagnosis Made 30 Years Later

Mandibulofacial dysostosis with microcephaly (MFDM) is a rare autosomal dominant condition that was first described in 2006. The causative gene, EFTUD2, identified in 2012. We report on a family that initially presented to a pediatric genetics clinic in the 1980s for evaluation of multiple congenital anomalies. Re-evaluation of one member thirty years later resulted in a phenotypic and molecularly confirmed diagnosis of MFDM. This family's clinical histories and the novel EFTUD2 variant identified, c.1297_1298delAT (p.Met433Valfs*17), add to the literature about MFDM. This case presented several genetic counseling challenges and highlights that "the patient" can be multiple family members. We discuss testing considerations for an unknown disorder complicated by the time constraint of the patient's daughter's pregnancy and how the diagnosis changed previously provided recurrence risks. Of note, 1) the 1980s clinic visit letters provided critical information about affected family members and 2) the patient's husband's internet search of his wife's clinical features also yielded the MFDM diagnosis, illustrating the power of the internet in the hands of patients. Ultimately, this case emphasizes the importance of re-evaluation given advances in genetics and the value of a genetic diagnosis for both patient care and risk determination for family members.

Genetics and Genomics in Oncology Nursing: What Does Every Nurse Need to Know?

In addition to the need for basic education about genetics/genomics, other approaches are suggested to include awareness campaigns, continuing education courses, policy review, and onsite clinical development. These alternative learning strategies encourage oncology nurses across the continuum of care, from the bedside/seatside to oncology nurse research, to integrate genomics into all levels of practice and research in the specialty of oncology nursing. All nurses are warriors in the fight against cancer. The goal of this article is to identify genomic information that oncology nurses, at all levels of care, need to know and use as tools in the war against cancer.

The spectrum of BRCA mutations and characteristics of BRCA-associated breast cancers in China: Screening of 2,991 patients and 1,043 controls by next-generation sequencing

To characterize the prevalence of BRCA mutations and characteristics of BRCA carriers in China and to update the clinical recommendations for BRCA testing, we conducted a wide screen for BRCA mutations using next-generation sequencing (NGS). A total of 4,034 Chinese subjects were screened for germline BRCA1/2 mutations, including 2,991 breast cancer patients and 1,043 healthy individuals from the community enrolled as controls. We developed an NGS-based approach to perform BRCA1/2 screening. BRCA mutations were identified in 9.1% (232/2,560) of cases with at least one risk factor, in 3.5% (15/431) of sporadic patients and in 0.38% (4/1,043) of healthy controls. The mutation frequency ranged from 8.9 to 15.2% in cohorts with a single risk factor to 16.6-100% in groups with multiple risk factors. We identified 70 novel BRCA mutations. A high frequency of BRCA1 c.5470_5477del was detected, accounting for 13.9% (16/115) of the BRCA1 mutations detected in our study. Clinical characteristics such as family history, invasive carcinoma, negative human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), high Ki67 index, lymph node status, and high tumour grade were closely related to BRCA mutations. BRCA2 carriers had poorer disease-free survival among HER2- or hormone receptor-positive patients (hazard ratio = 1.892; 95% confidence interval: 1.132-3.161; p = 0.013). This study shows that BRCA mutation carriers could be frequently identified among breast cancer patients with multiple risk factors. Importantly, we established an NGS-based pipeline for BRCA1/2 testing in clinical practice and strongly suggest that breast cancer patients of premier- and moderate-grade risks receive BRCA1/2 mutations testing in China.

Cancer Genetic Counseling and Testing in an Era of Rapid Change

The impacts of the Association for Molecular Pathology vs. Myriad Supreme Court decision regarding patenting DNA segments and multi-gene testing on cancer genetic counseling practice have not been well described. We aimed to assess genetic counselors' perceptions of how their genetic testing-related practices for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer (HBOC) changed after these events. One-hundred fifty-two genetic counselors from the National Society of Genetic Counselors Cancer Special Interest Group completed an anonymous, online, mixed-methods survey in November 2013. The survey presented four hypothetical patients and asked about changes in testing practice. Across the vignettes, a majority of participants reported specific changes in testing decisions following Association for Molecular Pathology vs. Myriad and availability of multi-gene testing. Ninety-three percent of participants reported changing the types of first- and second-line tests they order for HBOC; the degree of change varied geographically. Qualitative analysis indicated that some counselors have altered the counseling session content, trading depth of information for breadth and spending more time counseling about uncertainty. This study shows that cancer genetic counselors are adapting quickly to genetic testing changes, but with wide variability. Findings suggest future research to elucidate clinicians' and patients' preferences for guidance on the clinical implementation of next-generation sequencing.

The effect of a celebrity health disclosure on demand for health care: trends in BRCA testing and subsequent health services use

In May 2013, an internationally renowned celebrity-Angelina Jolie-disclosed her receipt of BRCA1/BRCA2 (BRCA) testing and subsequent double mastectomy in a highly publicized editorial. Publicity surrounding celebrity health services use increases awareness of important health issues and demand for health services. We aimed to describe BRCA testing trends before and after Jolie's disclosure, breast cancer-related services use following testing, and test reimbursement trends. MarketScan Commercial Claims data were used to compare trends in BRCA testing before and after Jolie's health disclosure using an interrupted time series model among women aged 18-64. We used modified Poisson regression to estimate risks for health services use (surgical consult, mastectomy, mammography, magnetic resonance imaging, genetic counseling) following BRCA testing. BRCA testing rates increased from 12.5 to 19.0 tests/100,000 women between January 2013 and October 2014. Immediately following Jolie's disclosure, testing increased by approximately 37% (p < 0.001). Although BRCA testing increased, use of post-testing follow-up services declined after Jolie's disclosure. Mean insurance reimbursement and patient out-of-pocket spending on the test decreased by 3 and 36%, respectively. While genetic testing uptake increased following Jolie's disclosure, subsequent health services use associated with BRCA mutations declined, suggesting that celebrity disclosures may be associated with potential genetic testing overuse.