To Reflex or Not: Additional BRCA1/2 Testing in Ashkenazi Jewish Individuals Without Founder Mutations

Treating ultra-orthodox adolescents with eating disorders in Israel: Culturally-sensitive interventions, difficulties, and dilemmas

Young ultra-Orthodox women in Israel have been faced in recent years with a greater risk of developing disordered eating, as they are more exposed to Westernized norms of the thin-body ideal, self-realization, and personal choice. Most are treated by mainstream Israeli psychotherapists who likely have different value systems and different perspectives on the nature of the illness, aims of treatment, and recovery. Ultra-Orthodox psychotherapists may well experience a conflict between a need to be loyal to their patients and a concomitant need to honor the values of patients' families and the community from which they come. The current article presents a theoretical background and four case studies highlighting the complexities and controversies inherent in the treatment of these women. We conclude that both ultra-Orthodox and mainstream secular psychotherapists must be knowledgeable in regard to both Judaism and psychology, and be flexible, creative, and emphatic to all parties, to arrive at a compromised definition of recovery that can be accepted by the patient, her family, and her community.

Prevalence of nonfounder BRCA1/2 mutations in Ashkenazi Jewish patients presenting for genetic testing at a hereditary breast and ovarian cancer center

BACKGROUND

Genetic assessment in Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) patients often is limited to BRCA1/2 founder mutation testing. With access to time-efficient and cost-efficient multigene panel testing, some advocate expanding genetic testing in this population. However, to the best of the authors' knowledge, rates of nonfounder BRCA1/2 mutations and mutations in cancer-associated genes other than BRCA1/2 among AJ are not known. In the current study, the authors sought to assess the prevalence of mutations other than BRCA1/2 founder mutations among AJ patients undergoing genetic assessment.

METHODS

The authors reviewed the medical records for all AJ patients who underwent genetic assessment at a single institution between June 2013 and December 2016. Mutations were categorized as 1) BRCA1/2 AJ founder mutations (BRCA1 185delAG, BRCA1 5382insC, or BRCA2 6174delT); 2) nonfounder BRCA1/2 mutations; or 3) mutations in non-BRCA1/2 cancer-associated genes.

RESULTS

A total of 732 AJ patients underwent genetic assessment. Of these, 371 patients (51%) had a personal history of breast or ovarian cancer, 540 patients (73.8%) had a family history of breast cancer, and 132 patients (18%) had a family history of ovarian cancer. In the study population, 101 patients (13.8%) were found to have a pathogenic mutation, 78 patients (10.7%) had a BRCA1/2 founder mutation, 3 patients (0.4%) had a nonfounder BRCA1/2 mutation, and 20 patients (2.7%) had a mutation in a non-BRCA1/2 cancer-associated gene. Non-BRCA1/2 cancer-associated genes harboring mutations included RAD51D, TP53, mutS homolog 6 (MSH6), checkpoint kinase 2 (CHEK2), adenomatous polyposis coli (APC), and Fanconi anemia group C protein (FANCC).

CONCLUSIONS

Among AJ patients found to have a pathogenic mutation on genetic assessment, approximately 22.8% had a mutation that would be missed with BRCA1/2 AJ founder mutation testing. Comprehensive multigene panel sequencing can provide clinically relevant genetic information for AJ patients and should be considered for genetic assessment in this population.

The yield of full BRCA1/2 genotyping in Israeli high-risk breast/ovarian cancer patients who do not carry the predominant mutations

PURPOSE

BRCA1 and BRCA2 genotyping results have clinical implications for cancer risk assessment and targeted therapy. Current practice in Israel is to genotype for the predominant BRCA1/2 mutations first, followed by full gene analysis in eligible mutation-negative individuals. This work assessed the rate of non-predominant mutations in BRCA1/2 in ethnically diverse high-risk cases.

METHODS

Breast and/or ovarian cancer patients who tested negative for the predominant BRCA1/2 mutations were referred for comprehensive BRCA1/2 genotyping if calculated risk for carrying a BRCA mutation was ≥ 10%.

RESULTS

Of 1258 eligible patients, 41 (3.3%) carried one of 38 mutations: 3% of Ashkenazi Jews and 3.4% of mixed ethnicities. Detection rate was < 5% among patients diagnosed with cancer younger than 40 or with bilateral breast cancer, and was 5.5% of ovarian cancer patients. Three of the carriers (7.3%) carried gene rearrangements. Three mutations were reported in more than one case.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall yield of comprehensive BRCA1/2 testing in ethnically diverse high-risk Israeli individuals is 3.3%. This is lower than expected by probability models. A slightly higher rate of BRCA1/2 carriers was seen among ovarian cancer cases. These data should guide BRCA1/2 optimal testing strategy in Israel.

Cancer Susceptibility Genetic Testing in a High-Risk Cohort of Urban Ashkenazi Jewish Individuals

Prior to 2013, genetic testing for Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) individuals primarily consisted of the three-site BRCA1/BRCA2 AJ panel, full sequencing of BRCA1/2, or the Lynch syndrome mismatch repair genes. Multigene panel testing became more widely available in 2013, but limited data are available regarding the impact of multigene panel testing for AJ individuals. Here, we report the frequency of cancer susceptibility gene mutations in a cohort of 427 AJ individuals seen in the Cancer Risk Clinic at The University of Chicago. We found that 29% of affected and 37% of unaffected individuals carried a pathogenic mutation (32% of overall cohort), primarily known familial mutations in BRCA1/2. A minority of mutations were identified in non-BRCA1/2 genes and consisted mainly of AJ founder mutations in CHEK2, APC, and the mismatch repair genes. A panel of AJ founder mutations would have identified the majority (94%) of mutations in clinically actionable genes in both affected and unaffected patients. Based on recent cost-effectiveness studies, offering all AJ individuals a founder mutation panel may be a cost-effective cancer prevention strategy.