Population screening for BRCA1/BRCA2 founder mutations in Ashkenazi Jews: proactive recruitment compared with self-referral

BRCA awareness and testing experience in the UK Jewish population: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

1 in 40 UK Jewish individuals carry a pathogenic variant in BRCA1/BRCA2. Traditional testing criteria miss half of carriers, and so population genetic testing is being piloted for Jewish people in England. There has been no qualitative research into the factors influencing BRCA awareness and testing experience in this group. This study aimed to explore these and inform improvements for the implementation of population genetic testing.

METHODS

Qualitative study of UK Jewish adults who have undergone BRCA testing. We conducted one-to-one semistructured interviews via telephone or video call using a predefined topic guide, until sufficient information power was reached. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and interpreted using applied thematic analysis.

RESULTS

32 individuals were interviewed (28 carriers, 4 non-carriers). We interpreted five themes intersecting across six time points of the testing pathway: (1) individual differences regarding personal/family history of cancer, demographics and personal attitudes/approach; (2) healthcare professionals' support; (3) pathway access and integration; (4) nature of family/partner relationships; and (5) Jewish community factors. Testing was largely triggered by connecting information to a personal/family history of cancer. No participants reported decision regret, although there was huge variation in satisfaction. Suggestions were given around increasing UK Jewish community awareness, making information and support services personally relevant and proactive case management of carriers.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need to improve UK Jewish community BRCA awareness and to highlight personal relevance of testing for individuals without a personal/family history of cancer. Traditional testing criteria caused multiple issues regarding test access and experience. Carriers want information and support services tailored to their individual circumstances.

Young Women's Perspectives on Being Screened for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk During Routine Primary Care

PURPOSE

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening women to identify individuals eligible for genetic counseling based on a priori hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) risk (i.e., risk assessment). However, risk assessment has not been widely integrated into primary care. This qualitative study explored young women's views on implementing routine HBOC risk assessment with a focus on equity and patient-centeredness.

METHODS

We conducted group discussions with young women (aged 21-40 years) receiving care in an integrated health care system. Discussion groups occurred in two phases and used a modified deliberative approach that included a didactic component and prioritized developing consensus. Twenty women participated in one of three initial small group discussions (phase one). All 20 were invited to participate in a subsequent large group discussion (phase two), and 15 of them attended.

FINDINGS

Key themes and recommendations were as follows. Risk assessment should be accessible, contextualized, and destigmatized to encourage participation and reduce anxiety, particularly for women who do not know their family history. Providers conducting risk assessments must be equipped to address women's informational needs, relieve emotionality, and plan next steps after positive screens. Finally, to minimize differential screening uptake, health care systems must prioritize equity in program design and contribute to external educational and outreach efforts.

CONCLUSION

Young women see pragmatic opportunities for health systems to optimize HBOC screening implementation.

Ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) and challenges in the design of a randomized controlled trial to test the online return of cancer genetic research results to U.S. Black women

BACKGROUND

A central challenge to precision medicine research efforts is the return of genetic research results in a manner that is effective, ethical, and efficient. Formal tests of alternate modalities are needed, particularly for racially marginalized populations that have historically been underserved in this context.

METHODS

We are conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to test scalable modalities for results return and to examine the clinical utility of returning genetic research results to a research cohort of Black women. The primary aim is to compare the efficacy of two communication modalities for results return: 1) a conventional modality that entails telephone disclosure by a Board-certified genetic counselor, and 2) an online self-guided modality that entails results return directly to participants, with optional genetic counselor follow-up via telephone. The trial is being conducted among participants in the Black Women's Health Study (BWHS), where targeted sequencing of 4000 participants was previously completed.

RESULTS

Several ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) and challenges presented, which necessitated substantial revision of the original study protocol. Challenges included chain of custody, re-testing of research results in a CLIA lab, exclusion of VUS results, and digital literacy. Bioethical principles of autonomy, justice, non-maleficence, and beneficence were considered in the design of the study protocol.

CONCLUSION

This study is uniquely situated to provide critical evidence on the effectiveness of alternative models for genetic results return and provide further insight into the factors influencing access and uptake of genetic information among U.S. Black women.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov: NCT04407611.

Diagnostic yield of genetic screening in a diverse, community-ascertained cohort

BACKGROUND

Population screening for genetic risk of adult-onset preventable conditions has been proposed as an attractive public health intervention. Screening unselected individuals can identify many individuals who will not be identified through current genetic testing guidelines.

METHODS

We sought to evaluate enrollment in and diagnostic yield of population genetic screening in a resource-limited setting among a diverse population. We developed a low-cost, short-read next-generation sequencing panel of 25 genes that had 98.4% sensitivity and 99.98% specificity compared to diagnostic panels. We used email invitations to recruit a diverse cohort of patients in the University of Washington Medical Center system unselected for personal or family history of hereditary disease. Participants were sent a saliva collection kit in the mail with instructions on kit use and return. Results were returned using a secure online portal. Enrollment and diagnostic yield were assessed overall and across race and ethnicity groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 40,857 people were invited and 2889 (7.1%) enrolled. Enrollment varied across race and ethnicity groups, with the lowest enrollment among African American individuals (3.3%) and the highest among Multiracial or Other Race individuals (13.0%). Of 2864 enrollees who received screening results, 106 actionable variants were identified in 103 individuals (3.6%). Of those who screened positive, 30.1% already knew about their results from prior genetic testing. The diagnostic yield was 74 new, actionable genetic findings (2.6%). The addition of more recently identified cancer risk genes increased the diagnostic yield of screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Population screening can identify additional individuals that could benefit from prevention, but challenges in recruitment and sample collection will reduce actual enrollment and yield. These challenges should not be overlooked in intervention planning or in cost and benefit analysis.

Residential Locale Is Associated with Disparities in Genetic Testing-Related Outcomes Among BRCA1/2-Positive Women

BACKGROUND

While research on hereditary genetic testing for BRCA1/2 mutations continues to emerge, there remain unanswered questions regarding access to testing and cancer-related care. Our study determined the associations between race/ethnicity, residential locale, and genetic testing provider and related outcomes among US women with BRCA1/2 genetic mutations.

METHODS

One hundred ninety-three BRCA1/2-positive women from vulnerable health backgrounds were recruited via private national Facebook BRCA1/2-oriented support groups and completed an online survey. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using multivariable logistic regression for the associations between race/ethnicity, residential locale, and genetic testing-related outcomes.

RESULTS

Women ranged in age (18-75, M = 39.5, SD = 10.7), and most were non-Hispanic white (66.3%) and lived in a suburban locale (54.9%). Women living in suburban areas were significantly less likely (aOR, .369, 95% CI, .177-.771) to receive behavioral referrals after genetic testing compared to those living in an urban locale. Women living in rural areas and suburban areas were 4.72 times more likely (95% CI, 1.48-15.1, p = .009) and 2.61 times more likely (95% CI, 1.05-6.48, p = .038), respectively, to receive genetic testing from a primary care provider versus private genetic testing office/hospital compared to women in urban locales. Associations between race/ethnicity and genetic testing outcomes were not statistically significant. Residential locale did not predict the odds of undergoing surgery for risk reduction or surveillance for early detection.

CONCLUSION

Our study identifies disparities in genetic testing resources among women living in suburban and rural areas. These findings can be used to inform future care, research, and community resources that may impact services relating to genetic testing within these locales.

Real World Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Population Screening for BRCA Variants among Ashkenazi Jews Compared with Family History-Based Strategies

Identifying carriers of pathogenic BRCA1/BRCA2 variants reduces cancer morbidity and mortality through surveillance and prevention. We analyzed the cost-effectiveness of BRCA1/BRCA2 population screening (PS) in Ashkenazi Jews (AJ), for whom carrier rate is 2.5%, compared with two existing strategies: cascade testing (CT) in carrier’s relatives (≥25% carrier probability) and international family history (IFH)-based guidelines (>10% probability). We used a decision analytic-model to estimate quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for PS vs. alternative strategies. Analysis was conducted from payer-perspective, based on actual costs. Per 1000 women, the model predicted 21.6 QALYs gained, a lifetime decrease of three breast cancer (BC) and four ovarian cancer (OC) cases for PS vs. CT, and 6.3 QALYs gained, a lifetime decrease of 1 BC and 1 OC cases comparing PS vs. IFH. PS was less costly compared with CT (−3097 USD/QALY), and more costly than IFH (+42,261 USD/QALY), yet still cost-effective, from a public health policy perspective. Our results are robust to sensitivity analysis; PS was the most effective strategy in all analyses. PS is highly cost-effective, and the most effective screening strategy for breast and ovarian cancer prevention. BRCA testing should be available to all AJ women, irrespective of family history.

From the patient to the population: Use of genomics for population screening

Genomic medicine is expanding from a focus on diagnosis at the patient level to prevention at the population level given the ongoing under-ascertainment of high-risk and actionable genetic conditions using current strategies, particularly hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), Lynch Syndrome (LS) and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). The availability of large-scale next-generation sequencing strategies and preventive options for these conditions makes it increasingly feasible to screen pre-symptomatic individuals through public health-based approaches, rather than restricting testing to high-risk groups. This raises anew, and with urgency, questions about the limits of screening as well as the moral authority and capacity to screen for genetic conditions at a population level. We aimed to answer some of these critical questions by using the WHO Wilson and Jungner criteria to guide a synthesis of current evidence on population genomic screening for HBOC, LS, and FH.

Primary care physician referral practices regarding BRCA1/2 genetic counseling in a major health system

PURPOSE

The United States Preventive Services Task Force recommends primary care physicians refer patients at high risk for BRCA1/2 mutations to genetic testing when appropriate. The objective of our study was to describe referrals for BRCA1/2 testing in a large integrated health system and to assess factors associated with referral.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study includes female patients between 18 and 50 years who had a primary care visit in the Cleveland Clinic Health System between 2010 and 2019. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate differences in the odds of a woman being referred for BRCA1/2 testing by patient factors and referring physician specialty. We also assessed variation in referrals by physicians.

RESULTS

Among 279,568 women, 5% were high risk. Of those, 22% were referred for testing. Black patients were significantly less likely to be referred than white patients (aOR 0.87; 95% CI 0.77, 0.98) and Jewish patients were more likely to be referred than non-Jewish patients (aOR 2.13; 95% CI 1.68, 2.70). Patients primarily managed by OB/GYN were significantly more likely to be referred than those cared for via Internal/Family Medicine (aOR 1.45; 95% CI 1.30, 1.61). Less than a quarter of primary care physicians ever referred a patient for testing.

CONCLUSION

The majority of primary care patients at high risk for a BRCA1/2 mutation were not referred for testing, and over a decade, most physicians never referred a single patient. Internal/Family Medicine physicians, in particular, need support in identifying and referring women who could benefit from testing.

Attitudes and interest in incorporating BRCA1/2 cancer susceptibility testing into reproductive carrier screening for Ashkenazi Jewish men and women

Pathogenic variants in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) genes are associated with elevated cancer risks in men and women. Due to a founder effect, Ashkenazi Jewish individuals are at higher risk for carrying three specific BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants. There have been recent calls for population screening in this population because many carriers do not have family histories suggestive of hereditary cancer. One approach could be to integrate optional BRCA1/2 testing into routinely offered reproductive carrier screening for recessive and X-linked disorders. However, the differing goals of these types of testing (i.e., personal health risks versus family planning) raise questions about the implications for patient education and informed consent. To this end, we aimed to determine interest, attitudes, and preferences regarding integrating such testing by electronically surveying 331 Ashkenazi Jewish participants in JScreen - a national, not-for-profit, at-home carrier screening program focused on genetic risks in Jewish communities. We found that while 41% of participants had plans to pursue BRCA1/2 testing, 93% would have opted for such testing if offered as an add-on to reproductive carrier screening. This was particularly true of those with higher perceived cancer risk and more positive attitudes toward genetic testing. With respect to preferences about delivery of this service, more than 85% of participants preferred remote (telephone, print, or web-based) genetic education rather than traditional genetic counseling. These results suggest that offering optional BRCA1/2 testing within the context of reproductive carrier screening might provide opportunities for cancer prevention without overburdening scarce genetic counseling resources.

Unselected Population Genetic Testing for Personalised Ovarian Cancer Risk Prediction: A Qualitative Study Using Semi-Structured Interviews

Unselected population-based personalised ovarian cancer (OC) risk assessments combining genetic, epidemiological and hormonal data have not previously been undertaken. We aimed to understand the attitudes, experiences and impact on the emotional well-being of women from the general population who underwent unselected population genetic testing (PGT) for personalised OC risk prediction and who received low-risk (<5% lifetime risk) results. This qualitative study was set within recruitment to a pilot PGT study using an OC risk tool and telephone helpline. OC-unaffected women ≥ 18 years and with no prior OC gene testing were ascertained through primary care in London. In-depth, semi-structured and 1:1 interviews were conducted until informational saturation was reached following nine interviews. Six interconnected themes emerged: health beliefs; decision making; factors influencing acceptability; effect on well-being; results communication; satisfaction. Satisfaction with testing was high and none expressed regret. All felt the telephone helpline was helpful and should remain optional. Delivery of low-risk results reduced anxiety. However, care must be taken to emphasise that low risk does not equal no risk. The main facilitators were ease of testing, learning about children’s risk and a desire to prevent disease. Barriers included change in family dynamics, insurance, stigmatisation and personality traits associated with stress/worry. PGT for personalised OC risk prediction in women in the general population had high acceptability/satisfaction and reduced anxiety in low-risk individuals. Facilitators/barriers observed were similar to those reported with genetic testing from high-risk cancer clinics and unselected PGT in the Jewish population.

Rate of breast biopsy referrals in female BRCA mutation carriers aged 50 years or more: a retrospective comparative study and matched analysis

Purpose

To evaluate the total biopsy and positive biopsy rates in women at high risk of breast cancer compared to the general population.

Methods

The study group consisted of 330 women with pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1/2 attending the dedicated multidisciplinary breast cancer clinic of a tertiary medical center in Israel. Clinical, genetic, and biopsy data were retrieved from the central healthcare database and the medical files. Patients aged 50 years or older during follow-up were matched 1:10 to women in the general population referred for routine breast cancer screening at the same age, as recommended by international guidelines. The groups were compared for rate of biopsy studies performed and percentage of positive biopsy results. Matched analysis was performed to correct for confounders.

Results

The total biopsy rate per 1000 follow-up years was 61.7 in the study group and 22.7 in the control group (p < 0.001). The corresponding positive biopsy rates per 1000 follow-up years were 26.4 and 2.0 (p < 0.001), and the positive biopsy percentages, 42.9% and 8.7% (p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Women aged 50 + years with PVs in BRCA1/2 attending a dedicated clinic have a 2.7 times higher biopsy rate per 1000 follow-up years, a 13.2 times higher positive biopsy rate per 1000 follow-up years, and a 4.9 times higher positive biopsy percentage than same-aged women in the general population.

Investigating men's motivations to engage in genetic screening for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations are associated with an increased risk of developing numerous cancers, including breast, ovarian, pancreatic, melanoma and prostate cancer. Men face BRCA-related cancer risks as women do. However, there is considerably less research on the psychological determinants of men engaging in BRCA1/2-related cancer prevention compared to women. The present research aimed to study the determinants of men’s motivations to engage in genetic screening for BRCA1 and BRCA2 through the lens of the Health Action Process Approach. One hundred and twenty-five men (mean age = 58.53 y/o, SD = 10.37) completed an online survey. The intention to undergo genetic screening for BRCA1/2 mutations in men was significantly and positively associated with self-efficacy and risk perception. Moreover, having offspring positively affected intention as well. The relationships between intention (and planning) and positive outcome expectancies, age, and family history of breast-related cancer were not statistically significant. Most information on BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations is tailored to women due to the availability of effective surgical risk reduction procedures for women’s breast and ovarian cancer. Future research should focus on the best methods of communicating informed decision-making for men facing the risk of such mutations.

Population Screening in Health Systems

Applications of genomics to population screening are expanding in the United States and internationally. Many of these programs are being implemented in the context of healthcare systems, mostly in a clinical research setting, but there are some emerging examples of clinical models. This review examines these genomic population screening programs to identify common features and differences in screened conditions, genomic technology employed, approach to results disclosure, health outcomes, financial models, and sustainability. The diversity of approaches provides opportunities to learn and better understand the optimal approach to implementation based on the contextual setting. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, Volume 23 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Targeted BRCA1/2 population screening among Ashkenazi Jewish individuals using a web-enabled medical model: An observational cohort study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate uptake and follow-up using internet-assisted population genetic testing (GT) for BRCA1/2 Ashkenazi Jewish founder pathogenic variants (AJPVs).

METHODS

Across 4 cities in the United States, from December 2017 to March 2020, individuals aged ≥25 years with ≥1 Ashkenazi Jewish grandparent were offered enrollment. Participants consented and enrolled online with chatbot and video education, underwent BRCA1/2 AJPV GT, and chose to receive results from their primary care provider (PCP) or study staff. Surveys were conducted at baseline, at 12 weeks, and annually for 5 years.

RESULTS

A total of 5193 participants enrolled and 4109 (79.1%) were tested (median age = 54, female = 77.1%). Upon enrollment, 35.1% of participants selected a PCP to disclose results, and 40.5% of PCPs agreed. Of those tested, 138 (3.4%) were AJPV heterozygotes of whom 21 (15.2%) had no significant family history of cancer, whereas 86 (62.3%) had a known familial pathogenic variant. At 12 weeks, 85.5% of participants with AJPVs planned increased cancer screening; only 3.7% with negative results and a significant family history reported further testing.

CONCLUSION

Although continued follow-up is needed, internet-enabled outreach can expand access to targeted GT using a medical model. Observed challenges for population genetic screening efforts include recruitment barriers, improving PCP engagement, and increasing uptake of additional testing when indicated.

Yield of targeted genotyping for the recurring pathogenic variants in cancer susceptibility genes in a healthy, multiethnic Israeli population

BACKGROUND

Several recurring pathogenic variants in BRCA1/BRCA2 and other cancer susceptibility genes are encountered in ethnically diverse Jewish populations. The yield of genotyping for these recurring pathogenic variants in healthy Israeli individuals unselected for ethnicity, sex, or a family history of cancer has not been previously reported.

METHODS

Individuals voluntarily participating in annual medical surveillance at the Institute of Medical Screening of Sheba Medical Center were offered genotyping for predominant pathogenic variants in BRCA1/BRCA2 and recurring variants in CHEK2, MUTYH, APC, and the Lynch syndrome genes via a chip-based assay at the oncogenetic service of Sheba Medical Center from May 15, 2018, to December 15, 2020. All study participants were unrelated to one another. The study was approved by the Sheba ethics committee.

RESULTS

Overall, 1764 individuals, including 1008 females (57%), with a mean age of 54.2 years (range, 25-86 years) were genotyped. The yield of the testing was 4% (71 of 1764), and it was higher in Ashkenazi Jews (AJs) and mixed AJ-non-AJ participants (4.75% [58 of 1222]; 1.8% for BRCA1/BRCA2 pathogenic variants) than non-AJ patients (2.2% [9 of 401]; 1% for BRCA1 pathogenic variants). When BRCA1/BRCA2 pathogenic variants were excluded, 2.44% carried low-penetrance variants, including CHEK2 c.1283C>T (n = 3), APC c.3920T>A (n = 36), and heterozygous MUTYH c.1187G>A (n = 4). A family history of cancer was not associated with a higher yield of pathogenic variant detection.

CONCLUSIONS

The observed rates of positive genotyping in a healthy, unselected, multiethnic Israeli population warrant consideration of the inclusion of targeted genotyping of selected pathogenic variants in high-penetrance and perhaps lower penetrance cancer susceptibility genes for all Jewish individuals in Israel, regardless of their ethnicity or family history of cancer.

Novel and recurrent BRCA1/BRCA2 germline mutations in patients with breast/ovarian cancer: a series from the south of Tunisia

Background

The incidence of breast cancer (BC) and/or ovarian cancer (OC) is increasing in Tunisia especially in young women and mostly those with family history. However, the spectrum of BRCA mutations remains little explored in Tunisian patients in particular in the southern region.

Methods

We sequenced the entire coding regions of BRCA1and BRCA2 genes using next generation sequencing (NGS) in 134 selected patients with BC and/or OC.

Results

Among the 134 patients, 19 (14.17%) carried pathogenic mutations (10 are BRCA1 mutation carriers and 9 are BRCA2 mutation carriers) that are mainly frameshift index (76.9%). Interestingly, 5 out of the 13 variants (38.46%) were found at least twice in unrelated patients, as the c.1310-1313 delAAGA in BRCA2 and the c.5030_5033 delCTAA that has been identified in 4/98 BC patients and in 3/15 OC patients from unrelated families with strong history of cancer. Besides recurrent mutations, 6 variant (4 in BRCA1 and 2 in BRCA2) were not reported previously. Furthermore, 3 unrelated patients carried the VUS c.9976A > T, (K3326*) in BRCA2 exon 27. BRCA carriers correlated significantly with tumor site (p = 0.029) and TNBC cases (p = 0.008). In the groups of patients aged between 31 and 40, and 41–50 years, BRCA1 mutations occurred more frequently in patients with OC than those with BC, and conversely BRCA2 carriers are mostly affected with BC (p = 0.001, and p = 0.044 respectively).

Conclusions

The overall frequency of the BRCA germline mutations was 14.17% in patients with high risk of breast/ovarian cancer. We identified recurrent mutations as the c.1310_1313 delAAGA in BRCA2 gene and the c.5030_5033 delCTAA in BRCA1 gene that were found in 4% and 20% of familial BC and OC respectively. Our data will contribute in the implementation of genetic counseling and testing for families with high-risk of BC and/or OC.

Experiences and attitudes of hereditary cancer screening patients in a consumer directed testing model

BACKGROUND

Since 2015, the Information is Power initiative has offered free and reduced cost hereditary cancer screening to the North Alabama population with a consumer-initiated model. Patients received pre-test and post-test education through a genetic counseling video. Positive results also received a call from a genetic counselor.

OBJECTIVE

We surveyed past Information is Power patients to assess if video education and electronic result delivery addressed the needs of a hereditary cancer screening population.

METHODS

An electronic survey was sent out to Information is Power patients who opted into research contact. The survey assessed participant knowledge, satisfaction with result delivery, and perceived uncertainty after receiving test results.

RESULTS

213 participants completed the survey. Eighteen percent of participants would have preferred individual communication with a genetics specialist about their results. Over 99 % of survey participants correctly interpreted a positive result, while 73 % correctly interpreted a negative result. Overall, participants were certain about the impact of their genetic test results.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

These findings support a model of population genetic testing and genetic counseling that is sustainable while meeting the educational needs of most participants. Observed misconceptions surrounding a negative result should be highlighted in future population screening patient resources to meet patient needs.

Initiatives to Scale Up and Expand Reach of Cancer Genomic Services Outside of Specialty Clinical Settings: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

This systematic review aims to (1) characterize strategies used to identify individuals at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome and Lynch syndrome outside of oncology and clinical genetic settings, (2) describe the extent to which these strategies have extended the reach of genetic services to underserved target populations, and (3) summarize indicators of the potential scalability of these strategies.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Investigators searched PubMed, EMBASE, and PsycINFO for manuscripts published from October 2005 to August 2019. Eligible manuscripts were those published in English, those that described strategies to identify those at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome or Lynch syndrome, those implemented outside of an oncology or genetic specialty clinic, and those that included measures of cancer genetic services uptake. This study assessed strategies used to increase the reach of genetic risk screening and counseling services. Each study was evaluated using the 16-item quality assessment tool, and results were reported according to the PRISMA guidelines.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Of the 16 eligible studies, 11 were conducted in clinical settings and 5 in public health settings. Regardless of setting, most (63%, 10/16) used brief screening tools to identify people with a family history suggestive of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome or Lynch syndrome. When reported, genetic risk screening reach (range =11%-100%) and genetic counseling reach (range =11%-100%) varied widely across studies. Strategies implemented in public health settings appeared to be more successful (median counseling reach=65%) than those implemented in clinical settings (median counseling reach=26%). Most studies did not describe fundamental components relevant for broad scalability.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to expand cancer genomic services are limited outside of traditional oncology and genetic clinics. This is a missed opportunity because evidence thus far suggests that these efforts can be successful in expanding the reach of genetic services with the potential to reduce health inequities in access. This review highlights the need for accelerating research that applies evidence-based implementation strategies and frameworks along with process evaluation to understand barriers and facilitators to scalability of strategies with high reach.

Adherence to NCCN Guidelines for Genetic Testing in Breast Cancer Patients: Who Are We Missing?

BACKGROUND

Genetic predisposition accounts for 5-10% of all breast cancers (BC) diagnosed. NCCN guidelines help providers identify appropriate candidates for counseling and testing. Concerns about underutilization of genetic testing have spurred interest in broader peri-diagnostic testing. We evaluated surgeon adherence to NCCN guidelines and studied patterns of testing in newly diagnosed BC patients.

METHODS

A total of 397 patients were identified with newly diagnosed BC treated at our institution between 2016 and 2017 with no prior genetic testing. Eligibility for genetic testing based on NCCN criteria, referral, and patient compliance were recorded.

RESULTS

In total, 212 of 397 (53%) met NCCN testing criteria. Fifty-nine of 212 (28%) patients went untested despite meeting one or more criteria. Fourteen of 59 (24%) of these were referred but did not comply. Most common criteria for meeting eligibility for testing both in the overall cohort and among missed patients were family history-based. Age > 45 years old and non-Ashkenazi Jewish descent were predictive of missed referral (p < 0.01). We identified pathogenic mutations in 16 of 153 (10%) patients who did undergo testing (11 (7%) BRCA1 or 2 and 5 (3%) with other predisposition gene mutations) or 16 of 397 (4%) among the overall group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data highlight the underutilization of genetic testing. Even in the setting of a full-service breast center with readily available genetic counseling, there is a substantial miss rate for identifying eligible patients, related to assessment of family history, patient age, and ethnicity, as well as patient compliance. Broader peri-diagnostic testing should be considered, and higher compliance rates with patients referred should be sought.

Population Screening for Inherited Predisposition to Breast and Ovarian Cancer

The discovery of genes underlying inherited predisposition to breast and ovarian cancer has revolutionized the ability to identify women at high risk for these diseases before they become affected. Women who are carriers of deleterious variants in these genes can undertake surveillance and prevention measures that have been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality. However, under current strategies, the vast majority of women carriers remain undetected until they become affected. In this review, we show that universal testing, particularly of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, fulfills classical disease screening criteria. This is especially true for BRCA1 and BRCA2 in Ashkenazi Jews but is translatable to all populations and may include additional genes. Utilizing genetic information for large-scale precision prevention requires a paradigmatic shift in health-care delivery. To address this need, we propose a direct-to-patient model, which is increasingly pertinent for fulfilling the promise of utilizing personal genomic information for disease prevention.

Economic Evaluation of Population-Based BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutation Testing across Multiple Countries and Health Systems

Clinical criteria/Family history-based BRCA testing misses a large proportion of BRCA carriers who can benefit from screening/prevention. We estimate the cost-effectiveness of population-based BRCA testing in general population women across different countries/health systems. A Markov model comparing the lifetime costs and effects of BRCA1/BRCA2 testing all general population women ≥30 years compared with clinical criteria/FH-based testing. Separate analyses are undertaken for the UK/USA/Netherlands (high-income countries/HIC), China/Brazil (upper–middle income countries/UMIC) and India (low–middle income countries/LMIC) using both health system/payer and societal perspectives. BRCA carriers undergo appropriate screening/prevention interventions to reduce breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) risk. Outcomes include OC, BC, and additional heart disease deaths and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Probabilistic/one-way sensitivity analyses evaluate model uncertainty. For the base case, from a societal perspective, we found that population-based BRCA testing is cost-saving in HIC (UK-ICER = $−5639/QALY; USA-ICER = $−4018/QALY; Netherlands-ICER = $−11,433/QALY), and it appears cost-effective in UMIC (China-ICER = $18,066/QALY; Brazil-ICER = $13,579/QALY), but it is not cost-effective in LMIC (India-ICER = $23,031/QALY). From a payer perspective, population-based BRCA testing is highly cost-effective in HIC (UK-ICER = $21,191/QALY, USA-ICER = $16,552/QALY, Netherlands-ICER = $25,215/QALY), and it is cost-effective in UMIC (China-ICER = $23,485/QALY, Brazil−ICER = $20,995/QALY), but it is not cost-effective in LMIC (India-ICER = $32,217/QALY). BRCA testing costs below $172/test (ICER = $19,685/QALY), which makes it cost-effective (from a societal perspective) for LMIC/India. Population-based BRCA testing can prevent an additional 2319 to 2666 BC and 327 to 449 OC cases per million women than the current clinical strategy. Findings suggest that population-based BRCA testing for countries evaluated is extremely cost-effective across HIC/UMIC health systems, is cost-saving for HIC health systems from a societal perspective, and can prevent tens of thousands more BC/OC cases.

Online BRCA1/2 screening in the Australian Jewish community: a qualitative study

Screening programmes for BRCA1/2 Jewish Founder mutations (JFM) in the Jewish community have been advocated internationally. Implementation of these programmes could decrease morbidity and mortality of BRCA1/2 JFM carriers through the uptake of cancer screening strategies and risk-reducing surgery. An online programme offered to the Sydney Jewish community that delivers pre-test information and collects consent for BRCA1/2 JFM testing via a website is currently being evaluated (JeneScreen). Forty-three participants from JeneScreen were invited to participate in a sub-study, of semi-structured pre- and post-result telephone interviews. Eleven participants consented to the sub-study. The interviews explored their experiences regarding the online model of obtaining pre-test genetic information, giving consent and receiving results. Inductive thematic analysis was carried out on the interviews. Overarching themes identified include (1) embracing online testing, (2) the online pre-test experience, (3) the result notification experience, (4) concerns associated with online testing and (5) testing as a responsibility. Overall, participants were highly satisfied with online BRCA1/2 JFM testing, an indication that the a website for pre-test information provision is an acceptable alternative to in-person genetic counselling for BRCA1/2 JFM screening and represents a feasible model for future community screening efforts.

Population-based Genetic Testing for Precision Prevention

Global interest in genetic testing for cancer susceptibility genes (CSG) has surged with falling costs, increasing awareness, and celebrity endorsement. Current access to genetic testing is based on clinical criteria/risk model assessment which uses family history as a surrogate. However, this approach is fraught with inequality, massive underutilization, and misses 50% CSG carriers. This reflects huge missed opportunities for precision prevention. Early CSG identification enables uptake of risk-reducing strategies in unaffected individuals to reduce cancer risk. Population-based genetic testing (PGT) can overcome limitations of clinical criteria/family history-based testing. Jewish population studies show population-based BRCA testing is feasible, acceptable, has high satisfaction, does not harm psychologic well-being/quality of life, and is extremely cost-effective, arguing for changing paradigm to PGT in the Jewish population. Innovative approaches for delivering pretest information/education are needed to facilitate informed decision-making for PGT. Different health systems will need context-specific implementation strategies and management pathways, while maintaining principles of population screening. Data on general population PGT are beginning to emerge, prompting evaluation of wider implementation. Sophisticated risk prediction models incorporating genetic and nongenetic data are being used to stratify populations for ovarian cancer and breast cancer risk and risk-adapted screening/prevention. PGT is potentially cost-effective for panel testing of breast and ovarian CSGs and for risk-adapted breast cancer screening. Further research/implementation studies evaluating the impact, clinical efficacy, psychologic and socio-ethical consequences, and cost-effectiveness of PGT are needed.

Risk Assessment, Genetic Counseling, and Genetic Testing for BRCA-Related Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Potentially harmful mutations of the breast cancer susceptibility 1 and 2 genes (BRCA1/2) are associated with increased risk for breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer. For women in the United States, breast cancer is the most common cancer after nonmelanoma skin cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death. In the general population, BRCA1/2 mutations occur in an estimated 1 in 300 to 500 women and account for 5% to 10% of breast cancer cases and 15% of ovarian cancer cases.

OBJECTIVE

To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for potentially harmful BRCA1/2 mutations in asymptomatic women who have never been diagnosed with BRCA-related cancer, as well as those with a previous diagnosis of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer who have completed treatment and are considered cancer free. In addition, the USPSTF reviewed interventions to reduce the risk for breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer in women with potentially harmful BRCA1/2 mutations, including intensive cancer screening, medications, and risk-reducing surgery.

FINDINGS

For women whose family or personal history is associated with an increased risk for harmful mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, or who have an ancestry associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations, there is adequate evidence that the benefits of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are moderate. For women whose personal or family history or ancestry is not associated with an increased risk for harmful mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, there is adequate evidence that the benefits of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are small to none. Regardless of family or personal history, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that the overall harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are small to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends that primary care clinicians assess women with a personal or family history of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer or who have an ancestry associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations with an appropriate brief familial risk assessment tool. Women with a positive result on the risk assessment tool should receive genetic counseling and, if indicated after counseling, genetic testing. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against routine risk assessment, genetic counseling, or genetic testing for women whose personal or family history or ancestry is not associated with potentially harmful BRCA1/2 gene mutations. (D recommendation).

Risk Assessment, Genetic Counseling, and Genetic Testing for BRCA-Related Cancer in Women: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Pathogenic mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 increase risks for breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer in women; interventions reduce risk in mutation carriers.

OBJECTIVE

To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force review on benefits and harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA1/2-related cancer in women.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane libraries; MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE (January 1, 2013, to March 6, 2019, for updates; January 1, 1994, to March 6, 2019, for new key questions and populations); reference lists.

STUDY SELECTION

Discriminatory accuracy studies, randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and observational studies of women without recently diagnosed BRCA1/2-related cancer.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data on study methods, setting, population characteristics, eligibility criteria, interventions, numbers enrolled and lost to follow-up, outcome ascertainment, and results were abstracted. Two reviewers independently assessed study quality.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Cancer incidence and mortality; discriminatory accuracy of risk assessment tools for BRCA1/2 mutations; benefits and harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and risk-reducing interventions.

RESULTS

For this review, 103 studies (110 articles; N = 92 712) were included. No studies evaluated the effectiveness of risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing in reducing incidence and mortality of BRCA1/2-related cancer. Fourteen studies (n = 43 813) of 8 risk assessment tools to guide referrals to genetic counseling demonstrated moderate to high accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.68-0.96). Twenty-eight studies (n = 8060) indicated that genetic counseling was associated with reduced breast cancer worry, anxiety, and depression; increased understanding of risk; and decreased intention for testing. Twenty studies (n = 4322) showed that breast cancer worry and anxiety were higher after testing for women with positive results and lower for others; understanding of risk was higher after testing. In 8 RCTs (n = 54 651), tamoxifen (relative risk [RR], 0.69 [95% CI, 0.59-0.84]; 4 trials), raloxifene (RR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.24-0.80]; 2 trials), and aromatase inhibitors (RR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.26-0.70]; 2 trials) were associated with lower risks of invasive breast cancer compared with placebo; results were not specific to mutation carriers. Mastectomy was associated with 90% to 100% reduction in breast cancer incidence (6 studies; n = 2546) and 81% to 100% reduction in breast cancer mortality (1 study; n = 639); oophorectomy was associated with 69% to 100% reduction in ovarian cancer (2 studies; n = 2108); complications were common with mastectomy.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among women without recently diagnosed BRCA1/2-related cancer, the benefits and harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing to reduce cancer incidence and mortality have not been directly evaluated by current research.

Multi-Gene Panel Testing of 23,179 Individuals for Hereditary Cancer Risk Identifies Pathogenic Variant Carriers Missed by Current Genetic Testing Guidelines

Recent advancements in next-generation sequencing have greatly expanded the use of multi-gene panel testing for hereditary cancer risk. Although genetic testing helps guide clinical diagnosis and management, testing recommendations are based on personal and family history of cancer and ethnicity, and many carriers are being missed. Herein, we report the results from 23,179 individuals who were referred for 30-gene next-generation sequencing panel testing for hereditary cancer risk, independent of current testing guidelines-38.7% of individuals would not have met National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria for genetic testing. We identified a total of 2811 pathogenic variants in 2698 individuals for an overall pathogenic frequency of 11.6% (9.1%, excluding common low-penetrance alleles). Among individuals of Ashkenazi Jewish descent, three-quarters of pathogenic variants were outside of the three common BRCA1 and BRCA2 founder alleles. Across all ethnic groups, pathogenic variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 occurred most frequently, but the contribution of pathogenic variants in other genes on the panel varied. Finally, we found that 21.7% of individuals with pathogenic variants in genes with well-established genetic testing recommendations did not meet corresponding National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. Taken together, the results indicate that more individuals are at genetic risk for hereditary cancer than are identified by current testing guidelines and/or use of single-gene or single-site testing.

Attitude towards and factors affecting uptake of population-based BRCA testing in the Ashkenazi Jewish population: a cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate factors affecting unselected population-based BRCA testing in Ashkenazi Jews (AJ).

DESIGN

Cohort-study set within recruitment to the GCaPPS trial (ISRCTN73338115).

SETTING

North London AJ population.

POPULATION OR SAMPLE

Ashkenazi Jews women/men >18 years, recruited through self-referral.

METHODS

Ashkenazi Jews women/men underwent pre-test counselling for BRCA testing through recruitment clinics (clusters). Consenting individuals provided blood samples for BRCA testing. Data were collected on socio-demographic/family history/knowledge/psychological well-being along with benefits/risks/cultural influences (18-item questionnaire measuring 'attitude'). Four-item Likert-scales analysed initial 'interest' and 'intention-to-test' pre-counselling. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression models evaluated factors affecting uptake/interest/intention to undergo BRCA testing. Statistical inference was based on cluster robust standard errors and joint Wald tests for significance. Item-Response Theory and graded-response models modelled responses to 18-item questionnaire.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Interest, intention, uptake, attitude towards BRCA testing.

RESULTS

A total of 935 individuals (women = 67%/men = 33%; mean age = 53.8 (SD = 15.02) years) underwent pre-test genetic-counselling. During the pre-counselling, 96% expressed interest in and 60% indicated a clear intention to undergo BRCA testing. Subsequently, 88% opted for BRCA testing. BRCA-related knowledge (P = 0.013) and degree-level education (P = 0.01) were positively and negatively (respectively) associated with intention-to-test. Being married/cohabiting had four-fold higher odds for BRCA testing uptake (P = 0.009). Perceived benefits were associated with higher pre-counselling odds for interest in and intention to undergo BRCA testing. Reduced uncertainty/reassurance were the most important factors contributing to decision-making. Increased importance/concern towards risks/limitations (confidentiality/insurance/emotional impact/inability to prevent cancer/marriage ability/ethnic focus/stigmatisation) were significantly associated with lower odds of uptake of BRCA testing, and discriminated between acceptors and decliners. Male gender/degree-level education (P = 0.001) had weaker correlations, whereas having children showed stronger (P = 0.005) associations with attitudes towards BRCA testing.

CONCLUSIONS

BRCA testing in the AJ population has high acceptability. Pre-test counselling increases awareness of disadvantages/limitations of BRCA testing, influencing final cost-benefit perception and decision-making on undergoing testing.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

BRCA testing in Ashkenazi Jews has high acceptability and uptake. Pre-test counselling facilitates informed decision-making.

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.

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.

Population Based Testing for Primary Prevention: A Systematic Review

The current clinical model for genetic testing is based on clinical-criteria/family-history (FH) and a pre-defined mutation probability threshold. It requires people to develop cancer before identifying unaffected individuals in the family to target prevention. This process is inefficient, resource intensive and misses >50% of individuals or mutation carriers at risk. Population genetic-testing can overcome these limitations. It is technically feasible to test populations on a large scale; genetic-testing costs are falling and acceptability and awareness are rising. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Pubmed, CINAHL and PsychINFO databases were searched using free-text and MeSH terms; retrieved reference lists of publications were screened; additionally, web-based platforms, Google, and clinical-trial registries were searched. Quality of studies was evaluated using appropriate check-lists. A number of studies have evaluated population-based BRCA-testing in the Jewish population. This has been found to be acceptable, feasible, clinically-effective, safe, associated with high satisfaction rates and extremely cost-effective. Data support change in guidelines for population-based BRCA-testing in the Jewish population. Population panel testing for BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1/PALB2 gene mutations is the most cost-effective genetic-testing strategy in general-population women and can prevent thousands more breast and ovarian cancers than current clinical-criteria based approaches. A few ongoing studies are evaluating population-based genetic-testing for multiple cancer susceptibility genes in the general population but more implementation studies are needed. A future population-testing programme could also target other chronic diseases.

Cancer genetics, precision prevention and a call to action

More than 15 years have passed since the identification, through linkage, of 'first-wave' susceptibility genes for common cancers (BRCA1, BRCA2, MLH1 and MSH2). These genes have strong frequency-penetrance profiles, such that the associated clinical utility probably remains relevant regardless of the context of ascertainment. 'Second-wave' genes, not tractable by linkage, were subsequently identified by mutation screening of candidate genes (PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, BRIP1, RAD51C and RAD51D). Their innately weaker frequency-penetrance profiles have rendered delineation of cancer associations, risks and variant pathogenicity challenging, thereby compromising their clinical application. Early germline exome-sequencing endeavors for common cancers did not yield the long-anticipated slew of 'next-wave' genes but instead implied a highly polygenic genomic architecture requiring much larger experiments to make any substantive inroads into gene discovery. As such, the 'genetic economics' of frequency penetrance clearly indicates that focused identification of carriers of first-wave-gene mutations is most impactful for cancer control. With screening, prevention and early detection at the forefront of the cancer management agenda, we propose that the time is nigh for the initiation of national population-testing programs to identify carriers of first-wave gene mutation carriers. To fully deliver a precision prevention program, long-term, large-scale mutation studies that capture longitudinal clinical data and serial biosamples are required.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations Other Than the Founder Alleles Among Ashkenazi Jewish in the Population of Argentina

In Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) high risk families 3 mutations [2 in BRCA1 (c. 68_69del and c.5266dup) and 1 in BRCA2 (c.5946del)] account for the majority of high risk breast and ovarian cancer cases in that ethnic group. Few studies with limited number of genotyped individuals have expanded the spectrum of mutations in both BRCA genes beyond the 3 mutation panel. In this study, 279 high risk individual AJ were counseled at CEMIC (Centro de Educación Médica e Investigaciones Clínicas), and were genotyped first for the 3 recurrent mutation panel followed by Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) of BRCA1 BRCA2 in 76 individuals who tested negative for the first genotyping step. Of 279 probands (259 women), 55 (50 women) harbored one of the 3 mutations (19.7%); Of 76 fully sequenced cases (73 women), 6 (5 women) (7.9%) carried a pathogenic mutation: in BRCA1, c.2728C>T - p.(Gln910^*); c.5407-?_(^*1_?)del and c.5445G>A - p.(Trp1815^*); in BRCA2, c.5351dup - p.(Asn1784Lysfs^*3); c.7308del - p.(Asn2436Lysfs^*33) and c.9026_9030del - p.(Tyr3009Serfs^*7). Of 61 mutation carriers the distribution was as follows: 11 cancer free at the time of genotyping, 34 female breast cancer cases with age range 28–72 years (41.6 ± 9.3), 3 male breast cancer cases with age range 59–75 years (65 ± 7.3), 6 breast and ovarian cancer cases with age range 35–60 years (breast 40.4 ± 5.2; ovary 47.8 ± 7.2) and 7 ovarian cancer cases with age range 41–77 years (60.6 ± 13.3). This information proved highly useful for counseling, treatment, and prevention for the patient and the family. In conclusion comprehensive BRCA1/2 testing in AJ high risk breast ovarian cancer cases adds valuable clinically relevant information in a subset of cases estimated up to 7% and is therefore recommended.

Developing a conceptual, reproducible, rubric-based approach to consent and result disclosure for genetic testing by clinicians with minimal genetics background

Purpose

In response to genetic testing being widely ordered by non-genetics clinicians, the Consent and Disclosure Recommendations (CADRe) Workgroup of the Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen; clinicalgenome.org) developed guidance to facilitate communication about genetic testing and efficiently improve the patient experience. Considering ethical, legal, social implications and medical factors, CADRe developed and pilot tested two rubrics addressing consent for genetic testing and results disclosure. The CADRe rubrics allow for adjusting the communication approach based on circumstances specific to patients and ordering clinicians.

Methods

We present results of a formative survey of 66 genetics clinicians to assess the consent rubric for 9 genes (MLH1, CDH1, TP53, GJB2, OTC; DMD, HTT, and CYP2C9/VKORC1). We also conducted interviews and focus groups with family and patient stakeholders (N=18), non-genetics specialists (N=27) and genetics clinicians (N=32) on both rubrics.

Results

Formative evaluation of the CADRe rubrics suggests key factors on which to make decisions about consent and disclosure discussions for a ‘typical’ patient.

Conclusion

We propose that the CADRe rubrics include the primary issues necessary to guide communication recommendations, and are ready for pilot testing by non-genetics clinicians. Consultation with genetics clinicians can be targeted towards more complex or intensive consent and disclosure counseling.

Cost effectiveness of population based BRCA1 founder mutation testing in Sephardi Jewish women

BACKGROUND

Population-based BRCA1/BRCA2 founder-mutation testing has been demonstrated as cost effective compared with family history based testing in Ashkenazi Jewish women. However, only 1 of the 3 Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA1/BRCA2 founder mutations (185delAG[c.68_69delAG]), 5382insC[c.5266dupC]), and 6174delT[c.5946delT]) is found in the Sephardi Jewish population (185delAG[c.68_69delAG]), and the overall prevalence of BRCA mutations in the Sephardi Jewish population is accordingly lower (0.7% compared with 2.5% in the Ashkenazi Jewish population). Cost-effectiveness analyses of BRCA testing have not previously been performed at these lower BRCA prevalence levels seen in the Sephardi Jewish population. Here we present a cost-effectiveness analysis for UK and US populations comparing population testing with clinical criteria/family history-based testing in Sephardi Jewish women.

STUDY DESIGN

A Markov model was built comparing the lifetime costs and effects of population-based BRCA1 testing, with testing using family history-based clinical criteria in Sephardi Jewish women aged ≥30 years. BRCA1 carriers identified were offered magnetic resonance imaging/mammograms and risk-reducing surgery. Costs are reported at 2015 prices. Outcomes include breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and excess deaths from heart disease. All costs and outcomes are discounted at 3.5%. The time horizon is lifetime, and perspective is payer. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-year was calculated. Parameter uncertainty was evaluated through 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Population testing resulted in gain in life expectancy of 12 months (quality-adjusted life-year = 1.00). The baseline discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for UK population-based testing was £67.04/quality-adjusted life-year and for US population was $308.42/quality-adjusted life-year. Results were robust in the 1-way sensitivity analysis. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed 100% of simulations were cost effective at £20,000/quality-adjusted life-year UK and the $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year US willingness-to-pay thresholds. Scenario analysis showed that population testing remains cost effective in UK and US populations, even if premenopausal oophorectomy does not reduce breast cancer risk or if hormone replacement therapy compliance is nil.

CONCLUSION

Population-based BRCA1 testing is highly cost effective compared with clinical criteria-driven approach in Sephardi Jewish women. This supports changing the paradigm to population-based BRCA testing in the Jewish population, regardless of Ashkenazi/Sephardi ancestry.

Population screening for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations: lessons from qualitative analysis of the screening experience

PURPOSE

Population screening for BRCA1/BRCA2. mutations is being considered for Ashkenazi Jews (AJ) because 2.5% carry recurrent deleterious mutations and effective cancer prevention exists. This study aimed to provide a qualitative focus on perspectives of individuals, particularly carriers, who were tested through a screening trial. In this trial, the pretest process included only written information.

METHODS

Interviews were performed with 26 carriers and 10 noncarriers who participated in a BRCA population screening trial for AJ.

RESULTS

Attitudes toward screening were generally positive. The main motivator for testing was knowledge of BRCA status to enable cancer risk reduction. Knowledge of carrier status, although challenging, was thus viewed as health-empowering. The screening paradigm was sensed as increasing awareness and as overcoming access, referral, and familial barriers. Streamlining the pretest process was positively perceived as offering gradual, stepwise knowledge commensurate with test results. Participants were concerned that health systems provide the necessary conceptual and infrastructural framework and that individual autonomy be maintained.

CONCLUSIONS

BRCA screening in AJ is viewed favorably, even by carriers. Stepwise acquisition of knowledge based on test results was viewed as most relevant to the screening context. Screening program development should account for safeguarding autonomy and providing requisite post-test services.Genet Med advance online publication 01 December 2016.