1
|
Abdel-Razeq H, Tamimi F, Iweir S, Sharaf B, Abdel-Razeq S, Salama O, Edaily S, Bani Hani H, Azzam K, Abaza H. Genetic counseling and genetic testing for pathogenic germline mutations among high-risk patients previously diagnosed with breast cancer: a traceback approach. Sci Rep 2024; 14:12820. [PMID: 38834641 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-63300-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2023] [Accepted: 05/27/2024] [Indexed: 06/06/2024] Open
Abstract
Genetic counseling and testing are more accessible than ever due to reduced costs, expanding indications and public awareness. Nonetheless, many patients missed the opportunity of genetic counseling and testing due to barriers that existed at that time of their cancer diagnoses. Given the identified implications of pathogenic mutations on patients' treatment and familial outcomes, an opportunity exists to utilize a 'traceback' approach to retrospectively examine their genetic makeup and provide consequent insights to their disease and treatment. In this study, we identified living patients diagnosed with breast cancer (BC) between July 2007 and January 2022 who would have been eligible for testing, but not tested. Overall, 422 patients met the eligibility criteria, 282 were reached and invited to participate, and germline testing was performed for 238, accounting for 84.4% of those invited. The median age (range) was 39.5 (24-64) years at BC diagnosis and 49 (31-75) years at the date of testing. Genetic testing revealed that 25 (10.5%) patients had pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants; mostly in BRCA2 and BRCA1. We concluded that long overdue genetic referral through a traceback approach is feasible and effective to diagnose P/LP variants in patients with history of BC who had missed the opportunity of genetic testing, with potential clinical implications for patients and their relatives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hikmat Abdel-Razeq
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, 202 Queen Rania Al Abdullah Street, P.O. Box: 1269, Amman, 11941, Jordan.
- School of Medicine, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan.
| | - Faris Tamimi
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, 202 Queen Rania Al Abdullah Street, P.O. Box: 1269, Amman, 11941, Jordan
| | - Sereen Iweir
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, 202 Queen Rania Al Abdullah Street, P.O. Box: 1269, Amman, 11941, Jordan
- CRDF Global, Global Health Mission Area, Amman, Jordan
| | - Baha Sharaf
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, 202 Queen Rania Al Abdullah Street, P.O. Box: 1269, Amman, 11941, Jordan
| | | | - Osama Salama
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, 202 Queen Rania Al Abdullah Street, P.O. Box: 1269, Amman, 11941, Jordan
| | - Sarah Edaily
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, 202 Queen Rania Al Abdullah Street, P.O. Box: 1269, Amman, 11941, Jordan
| | - Hira Bani Hani
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, 202 Queen Rania Al Abdullah Street, P.O. Box: 1269, Amman, 11941, Jordan
| | - Khansa Azzam
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, 202 Queen Rania Al Abdullah Street, P.O. Box: 1269, Amman, 11941, Jordan
| | - Haneen Abaza
- Office of Scientific Affairs and Research, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman, Jordan
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gima L, Solomon I, Hampel H. The Evolution of Genetic Testing from Focused Testing to Panel Testing and from Patient Focused to Population Testing: Are We There Yet? Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2024; 37:133-139. [PMID: 38606045 PMCID: PMC11006441 DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1770381] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/13/2024]
Abstract
The field of cancer genetics has evolved significantly over the past 30 years. Genetic testing has become less expensive and more comprehensive which has changed practice patterns. It is no longer necessary to restrict testing to those with the highest likelihood of testing positive. In addition, we have learned that the criteria developed to determine who has the highest likelihood of testing positive are neither sensitive nor specific. As a result, the field is moving from testing only the highest risk patients identified based on testing criteria to testing all cancer patients. This requires new service delivery models where testing can be mainstreamed into oncology clinics and posttest genetic counseling can be provided to individuals who test positive and those with concerning personal or family histories who test negative. The use of videos, testing kiosks, chatbots, and genetic counseling assistants have been employed to help facilitate testing at a larger scale and have good patient uptake and satisfaction. While testing is important for cancer patients as it may impact their treatment, future cancer risks, and family member's cancer risks, it is unfortunate that their cancer could not be prevented in the first place. Population testing for all adults would be a strategy to identify individuals with adult-onset diseases before they develop cancer in an attempt to prevent it entirely. A few research studies (Healthy Nevada and MyCode) have offered population testing for the three Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tier 1 conditions: hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome, Lynch syndrome, and familial hypercholesterolemia finding a prevalence of 1 in 70 individuals in the general population. We anticipate that testing for all cancer patients and the general population will continue to increase over the next 20 years and the genetics community needs to help lead the way to ensure this happens in a responsible manner.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren Gima
- Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Ilana Solomon
- Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Heather Hampel
- Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wu Z, Zhang Q, Jin Y, Zhang X, Chen Y, Yang C, Tang X, Jiang H, Wang X, Zhou X, Yu F, Wang B, Guan M. Population-based BRCA germline mutation screening in the Han Chinese identifies individuals at risk of BRCA mutation-related cancer: experience from a clinical diagnostic center from greater Shanghai area. BMC Cancer 2024; 24:411. [PMID: 38566028 PMCID: PMC10988807 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12089-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2023] [Accepted: 03/06/2024] [Indexed: 04/04/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Deleterious BRCA1/2 (BRCA) mutation raises the risk for BRCA mutation-related malignancies, including breast, ovarian, prostate, and pancreatic cancer. Germline variation of BRCA exhibits substantial ethnical diversity. However, there is limited research on the Chinese Han population, constraining the development of strategies for BRCA mutation screening in this large ethnic group. METHODS We profile the BRCA mutational spectrum, including single nucleotide variation, insertion/deletion, and large genomic rearrangements in 2,080 apparently healthy Chinese Han individuals and 522 patients with BRCA mutation-related cancer, to determine the BRCA genetic background of the Chinese Han population, especially of the East Han. Incident cancer events were monitored in 1,005 participants from the healthy group, comprising 11 BRCA pathogenic/likely pathogenic (PLP) variant carriers and 994 PLP-free individuals, including 3 LGR carriers. RESULTS Healthy Chinese Han individuals demonstrated a distinct BRCA mutational spectrum compared to cancer patients, with a 0.53% (1 in 189) prevalence of pathogenic/likely pathogenic (PLP) variant, alongside a 3 in 2,080 occurrence of LGR. BRCA1 c. 5470_5477del demonstrated high prevalence (0.44%) in the North Han Chinese and penetrance for breast cancer. None of the 3 LGR carriers developed cancer during the follow-up. We calculated a relative risk of 135.55 (95% CI 25.07 to 732.88) for the development of BRCA mutation-related cancers in the BRCA PLP variant carriers (mean age 42.91 years, median follow-up 10 months) compared to PLP-free individuals (mean age 48.47 years, median follow-up 16 months). CONCLUSION The unique BRCA mutational profile in the Chinese Han highlights the potential for standardized population-based BRCA variant screening to enhance BRCA mutation-related cancer prevention and treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhiyuan Wu
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China
| | - Qingyun Zhang
- Central Laboratory, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China
| | - Yiting Jin
- Department of General Surgery, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China
| | - Xinju Zhang
- Central Laboratory, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China
| | - Yanli Chen
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China
| | - Can Yang
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China
| | - Xuemei Tang
- Central Laboratory, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China
| | - Haowen Jiang
- Department of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China
| | - Xiaoyi Wang
- Department of Pancreatic Surgery, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China
| | - Xinli Zhou
- Department of Oncology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China
| | - Feng Yu
- Health Management Center, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China
| | - Bing Wang
- Health Management Center, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China.
| | - Ming Guan
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China.
- Central Laboratory, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 200040, Shanghai, China.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Sideris M, Menon U, Manchanda R. Screening and prevention of ovarian cancer. Med J Aust 2024; 220:264-274. [PMID: 38353066 DOI: 10.5694/mja2.52227] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Accepted: 12/11/2023] [Indexed: 03/07/2024]
Abstract
Ovarian cancer remains the most lethal gynaecological malignancy with 314 000 cases and 207 000 deaths annually worldwide. Ovarian cancer cases and deaths are predicted to increase in Australia by 42% and 55% respectively by 2040. Earlier detection and significant downstaging of ovarian cancer have been demonstrated with multimodal screening in the largest randomised controlled trial of ovarian cancer screening in women at average population risk. However, none of the randomised trials have demonstrated a mortality benefit. Therefore, ovarian cancer screening is not currently recommended in women at average population risk. More frequent surveillance for ovarian cancer every three to four months in women at high risk has shown good performance characteristics and significant downstaging, but there is no available information on a survival benefit. Population testing offers an emerging novel strategy to identify women at high risk who can benefit from ovarian cancer prevention. Novel multicancer early detection biomarker, longitudinal multiple marker strategies, and new biomarkers are being investigated and evaluated for ovarian cancer screening. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) decreases ovarian cancer incidence and mortality and is recommended for women at over a 4-5% lifetime risk of ovarian cancer. Pre-menopausal women without contraindications to hormone replacement therapy (HRT) undergoing RRSO should be offered HRT until 51 years of age to minimise the detrimental consequences of premature menopause. Currently risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy (RRESDO) should only be offered to women at increased risk of ovarian cancer within the context of a research trial. Pre-menopausal early salpingectomy is associated with fewer menopausal symptoms and better sexual function than bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. A Sectioning and Extensively Examining the Fimbria (SEE-FIM) protocol should be used for histopathological assessment in women at high risk of ovarian cancer who are undergoing surgical prevention. Opportunistic salpingectomy may be offered at routine gynaecological surgery to all women who have completed their family. Long term prospective opportunistic salpingectomy studies are needed to determine the effect size of ovarian cancer risk reduction and the impact on menopause.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michail Sideris
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Usha Menon
- Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
- Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Goh SP, Ong SC, Chan JE. Economic evaluation of germline genetic testing for breast cancer in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review. BMC Cancer 2024; 24:316. [PMID: 38454347 PMCID: PMC10919043 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12038-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2023] [Accepted: 02/21/2024] [Indexed: 03/09/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer affecting women globally. Genetic testing serves as a prevention and treatment strategy for managing BC. This study aims to systematically review economic evaluations and the quality of selected studies involving genetic screening strategies for BC in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS A search was performed to identify related articles that were published up to April 2023 on PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Only English-language LMIC studies were included. Synthesis of studies characteristics, methodological and data input variations, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and reporting quality (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklist) were performed. RESULTS This review found five pertinent studies, mainly focusing on economic evaluations of germline genetic testing in upper-middle-income countries (Upper MICs) like Malaysia, China, and Brazil. Only one study covered multiple countries with varying incomes, including lower-middle-income nations (Lower MICs) like India. The ICERs values in various screening scenarios for early-stage BC, HER2 negative BC patients, and healthy women with clinical or family history criteria were ranging from USD 2214/QALY to USD 36,342/QALY. Multigene testing for all breast cancer patients with cascade testing was at USD 7729/QALY compared to BRCA alone. Most studies adhered to the CHEERS 2022 criteria, signifying high methodological quality. CONCLUSIONS Germline testing could be considered as cost-effective compared to no testing in Upper MICs (e.g., Malaysia, China, Brazil) but not in Lower MICs (e.g., India) based on the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold set by each respective study. Limitations prevent a definite conclusion about cost-effectiveness across LMICs. More high-quality studies are crucial for informed decision-making and improved healthcare practices in these regions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sook Pin Goh
- Discipline of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia
| | - Siew Chin Ong
- Discipline of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia.
| | - Jue Ern Chan
- Pharmacy Department, Klinik Kesihatan Chemor Pejabat Kesihatan Daerah Kinta, Ipoh, Perak, Malaysia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Meshkani Z, Moradi N, Aboutorabi A, Farabi H, Moini N. A cost-benefit analysis of genetic screening test for breast cancer in Iran. BMC Cancer 2024; 24:279. [PMID: 38429685 PMCID: PMC10905849 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12003-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2023] [Accepted: 02/14/2024] [Indexed: 03/03/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of the population- and family history (FH) -based screening for BReast CAncer (BRCA) in Iran, a country where less than 10% of breast cancer cases are attributable to a gene mutation. METHODS This was an economic evaluation study. The Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) for genetic screening test strategies in Iranian women older than 30 was calculated. To this end, the monetary value of the test was estimated using the willingness-to-pay (WTP) approach using the contingent valuation method (CVM) by payment card. From a healthcare perspective, direct medical and non-medical costs were considered and a decision model for the strategies was developed to simulate the costs. A one-way sensitivity analysis assessed the robustness of the analysis. The data were analyzed using Excel 2010. RESULTS 660 women were included for estimating WTP and 2,176,919 women were considered in the costing model. The cost per genetic screening test for population- and FH-based strategies was $167 and $8, respectively. The monetary value of a genetic screening test was $20 and it was $27 for women with a family history or gene mutation in breast cancer. The BCR for population-based and FH-based screening strategies was 0.12 and 3.37, respectively. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSIONS This study recommends the implementation of a FH-based strategy instead of a population-based genetic screening strategy in Iran, although a cascade genetic screening test strategy should be evaluated in future studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zahra Meshkani
- Department of Health Economics, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
- Health Management and Economics Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, 13833-19967, Tehran, Iran.
| | - Najmeh Moradi
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Ali Aboutorabi
- Department of Health Economics, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Hiro Farabi
- Barts and The London Pragmatic Clinical Trial Unit, Centre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Nazi Moini
- Breast Cancer Research Centre, Motamed Cancer Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Wei X, Sun L, Slade E, Fierheller CT, Oxley S, Kalra A, Sia J, Sideris M, McCluggage WG, Bromham N, Dworzynski K, Rosenthal AN, Brentnall A, Duffy S, Evans DG, Yang L, Legood R, Manchanda R. Cost-Effectiveness of Gene-Specific Prevention Strategies for Ovarian and Breast Cancer. JAMA Netw Open 2024; 7:e2355324. [PMID: 38334999 PMCID: PMC10858404 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.55324] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2023] [Accepted: 12/16/2023] [Indexed: 02/10/2024] Open
Abstract
Importance Pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, and BRIP1 cancer susceptibility genes (CSGs) confer an increased ovarian cancer (OC) risk, with BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, and RAD51D PVs also conferring an elevated breast cancer (BC) risk. Risk-reducing surgery, medical prevention, and BC surveillance offer the opportunity to prevent cancers and deaths, but their cost-effectiveness for individual CSGs remains poorly addressed. Objective To estimate the cost-effectiveness of prevention strategies for OC and BC among individuals carrying PVs in the previously listed CSGs. Design, Setting, and Participants In this economic evaluation, a decision-analytic Markov model evaluated the cost-effectiveness of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) and, where relevant, risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) compared with nonsurgical interventions (including BC surveillance and medical prevention for increased BC risk) from December 1, 2022, to August 31, 2023. The analysis took a UK payer perspective with a lifetime horizon. The simulated cohort consisted of women aged 30 years who carried BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, or BRIP1 PVs. Appropriate sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed. Exposures CSG-specific interventions, including RRSO at age 35 to 50 years with or without BC surveillance and medical prevention (ie, tamoxifen or anastrozole) from age 30 or 40 years, RRM at age 30 to 40 years, both RRSO and RRM, BC surveillance and medical prevention, or no intervention. Main Outcomes and Measures The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. OC and BC cases and deaths were estimated. Results In the simulated cohort of women aged 30 years with no cancer, undergoing both RRSO and RRM was most cost-effective for individuals carrying BRCA1 (RRM at age 30 years; RRSO at age 35 years), BRCA2 (RRM at age 35 years; RRSO at age 40 years), and PALB2 (RRM at age 40 years; RRSO at age 45 years) PVs. The corresponding ICERs were -£1942/QALY (-$2680/QALY), -£89/QALY (-$123/QALY), and £2381/QALY ($3286/QALY), respectively. RRSO at age 45 years was cost-effective for RAD51C, RAD51D, and BRIP1 PV carriers compared with nonsurgical strategies. The corresponding ICERs were £962/QALY ($1328/QALY), £771/QALY ($1064/QALY), and £2355/QALY ($3250/QALY), respectively. The most cost-effective preventive strategy per 1000 PV carriers could prevent 923 OC and BC cases and 302 deaths among those carrying BRCA1; 686 OC and BC cases and 170 deaths for BRCA2; 464 OC and BC cases and 130 deaths for PALB2; 102 OC cases and 64 deaths for RAD51C; 118 OC cases and 76 deaths for RAD51D; and 55 OC cases and 37 deaths for BRIP1. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated both RRSO and RRM were most cost-effective in 96.5%, 89.2%, and 84.8% of simulations for BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 PVs, respectively, while RRSO was cost-effective in approximately 100% of simulations for RAD51C, RAD51D, and BRIP1 PVs. Conclusions and Relevance In this cost-effectiveness study, RRSO with or without RRM at varying optimal ages was cost-effective compared with nonsurgical strategies for individuals who carried BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, or BRIP1 PVs. These findings support personalizing risk-reducing surgery and guideline recommendations for individual CSG-specific OC and BC risk management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xia Wei
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Li Sun
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Eric Slade
- National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, London, United Kingdom
| | - Caitlin T. Fierheller
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Samuel Oxley
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ashwin Kalra
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Jacqueline Sia
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Michail Sideris
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - W. Glenn McCluggage
- Department of Pathology, Belfast Health & Social Care Trust, Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast, United Kingdom
| | - Nathan Bromham
- National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Adam N. Rosenthal
- Department of Gynaecology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation trust, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Women’s Cancer, UCL EGA Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Adam Brentnall
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Stephen Duffy
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - D. Gareth Evans
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Division of Evolution, Infection and Genomic Sciences, University of Manchester, MAHSC, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Li Yang
- School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Rosa Legood
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Guo F, Adekanmbi V, Hsu CD, Berenson AB, Kuo YF, Shih YCT. Cost-Effectiveness of Population-Based Multigene Testing for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Prevention. JAMA Netw Open 2024; 7:e2356078. [PMID: 38353949 PMCID: PMC10867683 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.56078] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2023] [Accepted: 12/21/2023] [Indexed: 02/16/2024] Open
Abstract
Importance The current method of BRCA testing for breast and ovarian cancer prevention, which is based on family history, often fails to identify many carriers of pathogenic variants. Population-based genetic testing offers a transformative approach in cancer prevention by allowing for proactive identification of any high-risk individuals and enabling early interventions. Objective To assess the lifetime incremental effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of population-based multigene testing vs family history-based testing. Design, Setting, and Participants This economic evaluation used a microsimulation model to assess the cost-effectiveness of multigene testing (BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2) for all women aged 30 to 35 years compared with the current standard of care that is family history based. Carriers of pathogenic variants were offered interventions, such as magnetic resonance imaging with or without mammography, chemoprevention, or risk-reducing mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy, to reduce cancer risk. A total of 2000 simulations were run on 1 000 000 women, using a lifetime time horizon and payer perspective, and costs were adjusted to 2022 US dollars. This study was conducted from September 1, 2020, to December 15, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), quantified as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Secondary outcomes included incremental cost, additional breast and ovarian cancer cases prevented, and excess deaths due to coronary heart disease (CHD). Results The study assessed 1 000 000 simulated women aged 30 to 35 years in the US. In the base case, population-based multigene testing was more cost-effective compared with family history-based testing, with an ICER of $55 548 per QALY (95% CI, $47 288-$65 850 per QALY). Population-based multigene testing would be able to prevent an additional 1338 cases of breast cancer and 663 cases of ovarian cancer, but it would also result in 69 cases of excess CHD and 10 excess CHD deaths per million women. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses show that the probability that population-based multigene testing is cost-effective was 100%. When the cost of the multigene test exceeded $825, population-based testing was no longer cost-effective (ICER, $100 005 per QALY; 95% CI, $87 601-$11 6323). Conclusions and Relevance In this economic analysis of population-based multigene testing, population-based testing was a more cost-effective strategy for the prevention of breast cancer and ovarian cancer when compared with the current family history-based testing strategy at the $100 000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. These findings support the need for more comprehensive genetic testing strategies to identify pathogenic variant carriers and enable informed decision-making for personalized risk management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fangjian Guo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston
- Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Women’s Health, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston
| | - Victor Adekanmbi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston
- Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Women’s Health, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston
| | - Christine D. Hsu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston
- Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Women’s Health, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston
| | - Abbey B. Berenson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston
- Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Women’s Health, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston
| | - Yong-Fang Kuo
- Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Women’s Health, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston
- Department of Biostatistics and Data Science, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston
- Office of Biostatistics, University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston
| | - Ya-Chen Tina Shih
- Program in Cancer Health Economics Research, Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, and Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Wildin RS. Cost Effectiveness of Genomic Population Health Screening in Adults: A Review of Modeling Studies and Future Directions. J Appl Lab Med 2024; 9:92-103. [PMID: 38167759 DOI: 10.1093/jalm/jfad093] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2023] [Accepted: 10/09/2023] [Indexed: 01/05/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Detecting actionable health risks for genetic diseases prior to symptomatic presentation at population scale using genomic test technologies is a preventive health innovation being piloted in multiple locations. Standard practice is to screen for risks only in those with personal or family history of specific disease. Genomic population heath screening has proven feasible and potentially scalable. The value of this intervention in terms of economic benefit has been scientifically modeled by several groups. CONTENT Eight recent cost-effectiveness modeling studies for high penetrance monogenic dominant diseases that used input parameters from 3 different countries are reviewed. Results and their uses in refining implementations are analyzed and the roles for laboratory medicine in facilitating success are discussed. SUMMARY The reviewed studies generally found evidence for cost-effectiveness of genomic population health screening in at least a subset of their base case screening scenario. Sensitivity analyses identified opportunities for improving the likelihood of cost-effectiveness. On the whole, the modeling results suggest genomic population health screening is likely to be cost-effective for high penetrance disorders in younger adults, especially with achievable reductions in test cost effected partially through combining tests for individual disorders into one screening procedure. Policies founded on the models studied should consider limitations of the modeling methods and the potential for impacts on equity and access in the design and implementation of genomic screening programs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert S Wildin
- Departments of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine and Pediatrics, The Larner College of Medicine at the University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, United States
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Westbrook L, Miltenburg D, Souter V, Maisenbacher MK, Howard KL, Sha Y, Yavari M, Kypraios N, Rodriguez A, Weitzel JN. Hereditary cancer testing in a diverse sample across three breast imaging centers. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2024; 203:365-372. [PMID: 37861889 PMCID: PMC10787882 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-023-07137-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2023] [Accepted: 09/21/2023] [Indexed: 10/21/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Up to 10% of all breast cancers (BC) are attributed to inherited pathogenic variants (PV) in BC susceptibility genes; however, most carriers of PVs remain unidentified. Here, we sought to determine the yield of hereditary cancer gene PVs among diverse women attending breast imaging centers, who could benefit from enhanced surveillance and/or risk reduction interventions. METHODS This cross-sectional retrospective cohort study included consecutive women, unselected for personal or family cancer history, who were offered genetic testing for hereditary cancer genes at the time of breast imaging at three centers (November 2020-March 2022). RESULTS Among 1943 patients (median age: 66 years), self-reported race/ethnicity was White (34.5%), Hispanic (27.7%), African American (17.9%), Asian (4.5%), Ashkenazi Jewish (0.6%), Other (3.5%), and missing (13.0%). Thirty-nine patients (2%) were identified as carriers of a PV in an autosomal dominant clinically actionable hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC)-related or Lynch syndrome gene, most frequently, BRCA2 (6/39; 15.4%), PALB2 (8/39; 20.5%), CHEK2 (10/39; 25.6%), and PMS2 (5/39; 12.8%). Of the 34 PVs with known race/ethnicity, 47% were detected among non-White patients. Overall, 354/1,943 (18.2%) of patients met NCCN guidelines for HBOC gene testing and only 15/39 (38.5%) patients with an autosomal dominant clinically actionable PV met guidelines. CONCLUSION This population health approach extended the reach of genetic cancer risk assessment in a diverse population and highlighted the limits of a guideline-based approach. This may help address inequity in access to risk-appropriate screening and cancer prevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Youbao Sha
- Natera, Inc., 13011 McCallen Pass, Austin, TX, 78753, USA
| | - Maygol Yavari
- Natera, Inc., 13011 McCallen Pass, Austin, TX, 78753, USA
| | | | | | - Jeffrey N Weitzel
- Natera, Inc., 13011 McCallen Pass, Austin, TX, 78753, USA.
- Precision Prevention, The Kansas University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Zhang D, Shi X, Zheng W, Zhang X, Chen Y. Rare HER2 L796P missense mutation promotes the growth and oncogenic signaling in breast cancer cells. Proteomics Clin Appl 2024; 18:e2300061. [PMID: 37672800 DOI: 10.1002/prca.202300061] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2023] [Accepted: 08/28/2023] [Indexed: 09/08/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE This research aimed to find potential HER2 mutations that would have an impact on breast cancer and investigate the underlying mechanism. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN This study first investigated 238 pairs of breast cancer and para-cancerous tissue samples from patients on the targeted next-generation sequencing (tNGS) platform. CCK-8 and clone formation assay were used to investigate whether the mutation exerts proliferative effects on breast cancer cells. In addition, mass spectrometry-based comparative proteomic and phosphoproteomic analyses of the mutation types and wild types of MCF-7 cell lines were carried out. RESULTS Among the identified mutations, a new mutation HER2 L796P promoted the proliferation of breast cancer cells and had resistance to lapatinib using CCK-8 cell proliferation assay and clone formation assay. The bioinformatic analysis showed that RAS family proteins and ERK phosphorylated proteins significantly increased in the L796P mutant cells. The Gene Ontology (GO) analysis revealed that L796P mutation affected the function of breast cancer at the level of upstream genes in the MAPK and PI3K-AKT-TOR pathways. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE This study demonstrated that a rare mutation HER2 L796P could be a potential therapeutic target for the clinical management of breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dongxue Zhang
- School of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China
| | - Xiaoyu Shi
- School of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China
| | - Weimin Zheng
- School of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China
| | - Xian Zhang
- School of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China
| | - Yun Chen
- School of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China
- State Key Laboratory of Reproductive Medicine and Offspring Health, Nanjing, China
- Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular & Cerebrovascular Medicine, Nanjing, China
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Lacaze P, Marquina C, Tiller J, Brotchie A, Kang YJ, Merritt MA, Green RC, Watts GF, Nowak KJ, Manchanda R, Canfell K, James P, Winship I, McNeil JJ, Ademi Z. Combined population genomic screening for three high-risk conditions in Australia: a modelling study. EClinicalMedicine 2023; 66:102297. [PMID: 38192593 PMCID: PMC10772163 DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102297] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2023] [Revised: 10/12/2023] [Accepted: 10/13/2023] [Indexed: 01/10/2024] Open
Abstract
Background No previous health-economic evaluation has assessed the impact and cost-effectiveness of offering combined adult population genomic screening for mutliple high-risk conditions in a national public healthcare system. Methods This modeling study assessed the impact of offering combined genomic screening for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome and familial hypercholesterolaemia to all young adults in Australia, compared with the current practice of clinical criteria-based testing for each condition separately. The intervention of genomic screening, assumed as an up-front single cost in the first annual model cycle, would detect pathogenic variants in seven high-risk genes. The simulated population was 18-40 year-olds (8,324,242 individuals), modelling per-sample test costs ranging AU$100-$1200 (base-case AU$200) from the year 2023 onwards with testing uptake of 50%. Interventions for identified high-risk variant carriers follow current Australian guidelines, modelling imperfect uptake and adherence. Outcome measures were morbidity and mortality due to cancer (breast, ovarian, colorectal and endometrial) and coronary heart disease (CHD) over a lifetime horizon, from healthcare-system and societal perspectives. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), discounted 5% annually (with 3% discounting in scenario analysis). Findings Over the population lifetime (to age 80 years), the model estimated that genomic screening per-100,000 individuals would lead to 747 QALYs gained by preventing 63 cancers, 31 CHD cases and 97 deaths. In the total model population, this would translate to 31,094 QALYs gained by preventing 2612 cancers, 542 non-fatal CHD events and 4047 total deaths. At AU$200 per-test, genomic screening would require an investment of AU$832 million for screening of 50% of the population. Our findings suggest that this intervention would be cost-effective from a healthcare-system perspective, yielding an ICER of AU$23,926 (∼£12,050/€14,110/US$15,345) per QALY gained over the status quo. In scenario analysis with 3% discounting, an ICER of AU$4758/QALY was obtained. Sensitivity analysis for the base case indicated that combined genomic screening would be cost-effective under 70% of simulations, cost-saving under 25% and not cost-effective under 5%. Threshold analysis showed that genomic screening would be cost-effective under the AU$50,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold at per-test costs up to AU$325 (∼£164/€192/US$208). Interpretation Our findings suggest that offering combined genomic screening for high-risk conditions to young adults would be cost-effective in the Australian public healthcare system, at currently realistic testing costs. Other matters, including psychosocial impacts, ethical and societal issues, and implementation challenges, also need consideration. Funding Australian Government, Department of Health, Medical Research Future Fund, Genomics Health Futures Mission (APP2009024). National Heart Foundation Future Leader Fellowship (102604).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul Lacaze
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia
| | - Clara Marquina
- Health Economics and Policy Evaluation Research (HEPER) Group, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| | - Jane Tiller
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia
| | - Adam Brotchie
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia
| | - Yoon-Jung Kang
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, A Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW 2011, Australia
| | - Melissa A. Merritt
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, A Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW 2011, Australia
| | - Robert C. Green
- Mass General Brigham, Broad Institute, Ariadne Labs and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02114, USA
| | - Gerald F. Watts
- School of Medicine, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA 6009, Australia
- Departments of Cardiology and Internal Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, WA, 6001, Australia
| | - Kristen J. Nowak
- Public and Aboriginal Health Division, Western Australia Department of Health, East Perth, WA, 6004, Australia
- Centre for Medical Research, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, 6009, Australia
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
- Department of Health Services Research, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1E 7HT, UK
| | - Karen Canfell
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, A Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW 2011, Australia
| | - Paul James
- Parkville Familial Cancer Centre, Peter McCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia
- Department of Genomic Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital City Campus, Parkville, VIC, 3050, Australia
- Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3050, Australia
| | - Ingrid Winship
- Department of Genomic Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital City Campus, Parkville, VIC, 3050, Australia
- Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3050, Australia
| | - John J. McNeil
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia
| | - Zanfina Ademi
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia
- Health Economics and Policy Evaluation Research (HEPER) Group, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Hanson H, Astiazaran-Symonds E, Amendola LM, Balmaña J, Foulkes WD, James P, Klugman S, Ngeow J, Schmutzler R, Voian N, Wick MJ, Pal T, Tischkowitz M, Stewart DR. Management of individuals with germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in CHEK2: A clinical practice resource of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Genet Med 2023; 25:100870. [PMID: 37490054 PMCID: PMC10623578 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2023.100870] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2023] [Revised: 04/21/2023] [Accepted: 04/24/2023] [Indexed: 07/26/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Although the role of CHEK2 germline pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition is well known, resources for managing CHEK2 heterozygotes in clinical practice are limited. METHODS An international workgroup developed guidance on clinical management of CHEK2 heterozygotes informed by peer-reviewed publications from PubMed. RESULTS Although CHEK2 is considered a moderate penetrance gene, cancer risks may be considered as a continuous variable, which are influenced by family history and other modifiers. Consequently, early cancer detection and prevention for CHEK2 heterozygotes should be guided by personalized risk estimates. Such estimates may result in both downgrading lifetime breast cancer risks to those similar to the general population or upgrading lifetime risk to a level at which CHEK2 heterozygotes are offered high-risk breast surveillance according to country-specific guidelines. Risk-reducing mastectomy should be guided by personalized risk estimates and shared decision making. Colorectal and prostate cancer surveillance should be considered based on assessment of family history. For CHEK2 heterozygotes who develop cancer, no specific targeted medical treatment is recommended at this time. CONCLUSION Systematic prospective data collection is needed to establish the spectrum of CHEK2-associated cancer risks and to determine yet-unanswered questions, such as the outcomes of surveillance, response to cancer treatment, and survival after cancer diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Helen Hanson
- Southwest Thames Regional Genetics Service, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Esteban Astiazaran-Symonds
- Clinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD; Department of Medicine, College of Medicine-Tucson, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
| | | | - Judith Balmaña
- Hereditary Cancer Genetics Group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain; Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Vall d'Hebron Hospital Campus, Barcelona, Spain
| | - William D Foulkes
- Departments of Human Genetics, Oncology and Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada
| | - Paul James
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Parkville Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Susan Klugman
- Division of Reproductive & Medical Genetics, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Women's Health, Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY
| | - Joanne Ngeow
- Genomic Medicine, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore; Cancer Genetics Service, Division of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore
| | - Rita Schmutzler
- Center of Integrated Oncology (CIO), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany; Center for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Nicoleta Voian
- Providence Genetic Risk Clinic, Providence Cancer Institute, Portland, OR
| | - Myra J Wick
- Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Clinical Genomics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Tuya Pal
- Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center/Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN
| | - Marc Tischkowitz
- Department of Medical Genetics, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Douglas R Stewart
- Clinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Lepage M, Uhrhammer N, Privat M, Ponelle-Chachuat F, Kossai M, Scanzi J, Ouedraogo ZG, Gay-Bellile M, Bidet Y, Cavaillé M. Case Series of 11 CDH1 Families (47 Carriers) Including Incidental Findings, Signet Ring Cell Colon Cancer and Review of the Literature. Genes (Basel) 2023; 14:1677. [PMID: 37761816 PMCID: PMC10530895 DOI: 10.3390/genes14091677] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2023] [Revised: 08/22/2023] [Accepted: 08/23/2023] [Indexed: 09/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Germline pathogenic variants in E-cadherin (CDH1) confer high risk of developing lobular breast cancer and diffuse gastric cancer (DGC). The cumulative risk of DGC in CDH1 carriers has been recently reassessed (from 40-83% by age 80 to 25-42%) and varies according to the presence and number of gastric cancers in the family. As there is no accurate estimate of the risk of gastric cancer in families without DGC, the International Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium recommendation is not straightforward: prophylactic gastrectomy or endoscopic surveillance should be proposed for these families. The inclusion of CDH1 in constitutional gene panels for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and for gastrointestinal cancers, recommended by the French Genetic and Cancer Consortium in 2018 and 2020, leads to the identification of families with lobular cancer without DGC but also to incidental findings of pathogenic variants. Management of CDH1 carriers in case of incidental findings is complex and causes dilemmas for both patients and providers. We report eleven families (47 CDH1 carriers) from our oncogenetic department specialized in breast and ovarian cancer, including four incidental findings. We confirmed that six families did not have diffuse gastric cancer in their medical records. We discuss the management of the risk of diffuse gastric cancer in Hereditary Lobular Breast Cancer (HLBC) through a family of 11 CDH1 carriers where foci were identified in endoscopic surveillance. We also report a new colon signet ring cancer case in a CDH1 carrier, a rare aggressive cancer included in CDH1-related malignancies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mathis Lepage
- Département d’Oncogénétique, Centre Jean Perrin, 63011 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (N.U.); (M.P.); (F.P.-C.); (M.G.-B.); (M.C.)
- INSERM, U1240 Imagerie Moléculaire et Stratégies Théranostiques, Université Clermont Auvergne, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (M.K.); (Y.B.)
| | - Nancy Uhrhammer
- Département d’Oncogénétique, Centre Jean Perrin, 63011 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (N.U.); (M.P.); (F.P.-C.); (M.G.-B.); (M.C.)
- INSERM, U1240 Imagerie Moléculaire et Stratégies Théranostiques, Université Clermont Auvergne, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (M.K.); (Y.B.)
| | - Maud Privat
- Département d’Oncogénétique, Centre Jean Perrin, 63011 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (N.U.); (M.P.); (F.P.-C.); (M.G.-B.); (M.C.)
- INSERM, U1240 Imagerie Moléculaire et Stratégies Théranostiques, Université Clermont Auvergne, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (M.K.); (Y.B.)
| | - Flora Ponelle-Chachuat
- Département d’Oncogénétique, Centre Jean Perrin, 63011 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (N.U.); (M.P.); (F.P.-C.); (M.G.-B.); (M.C.)
- INSERM, U1240 Imagerie Moléculaire et Stratégies Théranostiques, Université Clermont Auvergne, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (M.K.); (Y.B.)
| | - Myriam Kossai
- INSERM, U1240 Imagerie Moléculaire et Stratégies Théranostiques, Université Clermont Auvergne, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (M.K.); (Y.B.)
- Department of Pathology and Molecular Pathology, Centre Jean Perrin, 63011 Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | | | - Zangbéwendé Guy Ouedraogo
- Service de Biochimie et Génétique Moléculaire, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France;
- CNRS, INSERM, iGReD, Université Clermont Auvergne, 63001 Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Mathilde Gay-Bellile
- Département d’Oncogénétique, Centre Jean Perrin, 63011 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (N.U.); (M.P.); (F.P.-C.); (M.G.-B.); (M.C.)
- INSERM, U1240 Imagerie Moléculaire et Stratégies Théranostiques, Université Clermont Auvergne, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (M.K.); (Y.B.)
| | - Yannick Bidet
- INSERM, U1240 Imagerie Moléculaire et Stratégies Théranostiques, Université Clermont Auvergne, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (M.K.); (Y.B.)
| | - Mathias Cavaillé
- Département d’Oncogénétique, Centre Jean Perrin, 63011 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (N.U.); (M.P.); (F.P.-C.); (M.G.-B.); (M.C.)
- INSERM, U1240 Imagerie Moléculaire et Stratégies Théranostiques, Université Clermont Auvergne, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France; (M.K.); (Y.B.)
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
O'Brien TD, Potter AB, Driscoll CC, Goh G, Letaw JH, McCabe S, Thanner J, Kulkarni A, Wong R, Medica S, Week T, Buitrago J, Larson A, Camacho KJ, Brown K, Crist R, Conrad C, Evans-Dutson S, Lutz R, Mitchell A, Anur P, Serrato V, Shafer A, Marriott LK, Hamman KJ, Mulford A, Wiszniewski W, Sampson JE, Adey A, O'Roak BJ, Harrington CA, Shannon J, Spellman PT, Richards CS. Population screening shows risk of inherited cancer and familial hypercholesterolemia in Oregon. Am J Hum Genet 2023; 110:1249-1265. [PMID: 37506692 PMCID: PMC10432140 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2023.06.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2023] [Revised: 06/28/2023] [Accepted: 06/29/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023] Open
Abstract
The Healthy Oregon Project (HOP) is a statewide effort that aims to build a large research repository and influence the health of Oregonians through providing no-cost genetic screening to participants for a next-generation sequencing 32-gene panel comprising genes related to inherited cancers and familial hypercholesterolemia. This type of unbiased population screening can detect at-risk individuals who may otherwise be missed by conventional medical approaches. However, challenges exist for this type of high-throughput testing in an academic setting, including developing a low-cost high-efficiency test and scaling up the clinical laboratory for processing large numbers of samples. Modifications to our academic clinical laboratory including efficient test design, robotics, and a streamlined analysis approach increased our ability to test more than 1,000 samples per month for HOP using only one dedicated HOP laboratory technologist. Additionally, enrollment using a HIPAA-compliant smartphone app and sample collection using mouthwash increased efficiency and reduced cost. Here, we present our experience three years into HOP and discuss the lessons learned, including our successes, challenges, opportunities, and future directions, as well as the genetic screening results for the first 13,670 participants tested. Overall, we have identified 730 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in 710 participants in 24 of the 32 genes on the panel. The carrier rate for pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in the inherited cancer genes on the panel for an unselected population was 5.0% and for familial hypercholesterolemia was 0.3%. Our laboratory experience described here may provide a useful model for population screening projects in other states.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy D O'Brien
- Knight Diagnostic Laboratories, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Amiee B Potter
- Knight Diagnostic Laboratories, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Catherine C Driscoll
- Knight Diagnostic Laboratories, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA; Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research Center, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
| | - Gregory Goh
- Knight Diagnostic Laboratories, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA; Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research Center, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
| | - John H Letaw
- Knight Diagnostic Laboratories, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Sarah McCabe
- Knight Diagnostic Laboratories, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Jane Thanner
- Information Technology Group, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
| | - Arpita Kulkarni
- Knight Diagnostic Laboratories, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Rossana Wong
- Knight Diagnostic Laboratories, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Samuel Medica
- Integrated Genomics Laboratory, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Tiana Week
- Integrated Genomics Laboratory, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Jacob Buitrago
- Integrated Genomics Laboratory, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Aaron Larson
- Integrated Genomics Laboratory, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Katie Johnson Camacho
- Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research Center, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
| | - Kim Brown
- Knight Cancer Institute, Community Outreach and Engagement, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
| | - Rachel Crist
- Knight Cancer Institute, Community Outreach and Engagement, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
| | - Casey Conrad
- Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research Center, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
| | - Sara Evans-Dutson
- Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research Center, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
| | - Ryan Lutz
- Knight Cancer Institute, Community Outreach and Engagement, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
| | - Asia Mitchell
- Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research Center, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
| | - Pavana Anur
- Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research Center, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
| | - Vanessa Serrato
- Knight Cancer Institute, Community Outreach and Engagement, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
| | - Autumn Shafer
- University of Oregon, School of Journalism and Communication, Portland, OR 97209, USA
| | | | - K J Hamman
- Department of Molecular & Medical Genetics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Amelia Mulford
- Department of Molecular & Medical Genetics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Wojciech Wiszniewski
- Department of Molecular & Medical Genetics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Jone E Sampson
- Department of Molecular & Medical Genetics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Andrew Adey
- Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research Center, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA; Department of Molecular & Medical Genetics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Brian J O'Roak
- Department of Molecular & Medical Genetics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Christina A Harrington
- Integrated Genomics Laboratory, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA; Department of Molecular & Medical Genetics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Jackilen Shannon
- Knight Cancer Institute, Community Outreach and Engagement, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA; Division of Oncological Sciences, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Paul T Spellman
- Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research Center, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97201, USA; Department of Molecular & Medical Genetics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - C Sue Richards
- Knight Diagnostic Laboratories, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA; Department of Molecular & Medical Genetics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Xi Q, Jin S, Morris S. Economic evaluations of predictive genetic testing: A scoping review. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0276572. [PMID: 37531363 PMCID: PMC10395838 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276572] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2022] [Accepted: 04/03/2023] [Indexed: 08/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Predictive genetic testing can provide information about whether or not someone will develop or is likely to develop a specific condition at a later stage in life. Economic evaluation can assess the value of money for such testing. Studies on the economic evaluation of predictive genetic testing have been carried out in a variety of settings, and this research aims to conduct a scoping review of findings from these studies. We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases with combined search terms, from 2019 to 2022. Relevant studies from 2013 to 2019 in a previous systematic review were also included. The study followed the recommended stages for undertaking a scoping review. A total of 53 studies were included, including 33 studies from the previous review and 20 studies from the search of databases. A significant number of studies focused on the US, UK, and Australia (34%, 23%, and 11%). The most frequently included health conditions were cancer and cardiovascular diseases (68% and 19%). Over half of the studies compared predictive genetic testing with no genetic testing, and the majority of them concluded that at least some type of genetic testing was cost-effective compared to no testing (94%). Some studies stated that predictive genetic testing is becoming more cost-effective with the trend of lowering genetic testing costs. Studies on predictive genetic testing covered various health conditions, particularly cancer and cardiovascular diseases. Most studies indicated that predictive genetic testing is cost-effective compared to no testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qin Xi
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Shihan Jin
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Health Economics, Leonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics, School of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, United States of America
| | - Stephen Morris
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Liu Q, Davis J, Han X, Mackey DA, MacGregor S, Craig JE, Si L, Hewitt AW. Cost-effectiveness of polygenic risk profiling for primary open-angle glaucoma in the United Kingdom and Australia. Eye (Lond) 2023; 37:2335-2343. [PMID: 36513856 PMCID: PMC10366078 DOI: 10.1038/s41433-022-02346-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2022] [Revised: 10/11/2022] [Accepted: 12/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) is the most common subtype of glaucoma. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of polygenic risk score (PRS) profiling as a screening tool for POAG. METHODS We used a Markov cohort model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of implementing PRS screening in the UK and Australia, conducted from the healthcare payer's perspective. We used published data to calculate prevalence, transition probabilities, utility, cost and other parameters in the model. Our main outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and secondary outcomes were years of blindness avoided and a 'Blindness ICER'. We did one-way as well as two-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS The proposed screening programme for POAG in the UK is predicted to result in ICER of £24,783 (95% CI: £13,373-66,960) and would avoid 1 year of blindness at ICER of £10,095 (95% CI: £5513-27,656). In Australia, it is predicted to result in ICER of AU$34,252 (95% CI: AU$21,324-95,497) and would avoid 1 year of blindness at ICER of AU$13,359 (95% CI: AU$8143-37,448). Using the willingness to pay thresholds of $54,808 and £30,000, the proposed screening model is 79.2% likely to be cost-effective in Australia and is 60.2% likely to be cost-effective in the UK, respectively. CONCLUSION We describe and model the cost-efficacy of incorporating a polygenic risk score for POAG screening in Australia and the UK for the first time and results indicated this is a promising cost-effectiveness strategy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qinqin Liu
- Menzies Institute for Medical Research, School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, Australia
- Centre for Eye Research Australia, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - John Davis
- Menzies Institute for Medical Research, School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, Australia
- Centre for Eye Research Australia, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Xikun Han
- QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - David A Mackey
- Menzies Institute for Medical Research, School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, Australia
- Centre for Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Lions Eye Institute, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - Stuart MacGregor
- QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Jamie E Craig
- Department of Ophthalmology, Flinders University, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| | - Lei Si
- School of Health Sciences, Western Sydney University, Campbelltown, NSW, Australia.
- The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
| | - Alex W Hewitt
- Menzies Institute for Medical Research, School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, Australia.
- Centre for Eye Research Australia, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Guzauskas GF, Garbett S, Zhou Z, Schildcrout JS, Graves JA, Williams MS, Hao J, Jones LK, Spencer SJ, Jiang S, Veenstra DL, Peterson JF. Population Genomic Screening for Three Common Hereditary Conditions : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Ann Intern Med 2023; 176:585-595. [PMID: 37155986 DOI: 10.7326/m22-0846] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The cost-effectiveness of screening the U.S. population for Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Tier 1 genomic conditions is unknown. OBJECTIVE To estimate the cost-effectiveness of simultaneous genomic screening for Lynch syndrome (LS), hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC), and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). DESIGN Decision analytic Markov model. DATA SOURCES Published literature. TARGET POPULATION Separate age-based cohorts (ages 20 to 60 years at time of screening) of racially and ethnically representative U.S. adults. TIME HORIZON Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE U.S. health care payer. INTERVENTION Population genomic screening using clinical sequencing with a restricted panel of high-evidence genes, cascade testing of first-degree relatives, and recommended preventive interventions for identified probands. OUTCOME MEASURES Incident breast, ovarian, and colorectal cancer cases; incident cardiovascular events; quality-adjusted survival; and costs. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS Screening 100 000 unselected 30-year-olds resulted in 101 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 77 to 127) fewer overall cancer cases and 15 (95% UI, 4 to 28) fewer cardiovascular events and an increase of 495 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (95% UI, 401 to 757) at an incremental cost of $33.9 million (95% UI, $27.0 million to $41.1 million). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $68 600 per QALY gained (95% UI, $41 800 to $88 900). RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS Screening 30-, 40-, and 50-year-old cohorts was cost-effective in 99%, 88%, and 19% of probabilistic simulations, respectively, at a $100 000-per-QALY threshold. The test costs at which screening 30-, 40-, and 50-year-olds reached the $100 000-per-QALY threshold were $413, $290, and $166, respectively. Variant prevalence and adherence to preventive interventions were also highly influential parameters. LIMITATIONS Population averages for model inputs, which were derived predominantly from European populations, vary across ancestries and health care environments. CONCLUSION Population genomic screening with a restricted panel of high-evidence genes associated with 3 CDC Tier 1 conditions is likely to be cost-effective in U.S. adults younger than 40 years if the testing cost is relatively low and probands have access to preventive interventions. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE National Human Genome Research Institute.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregory F Guzauskas
- The CHOICE Institute, Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (G.F.G., S.J.)
| | - Shawn Garbett
- Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee (S.G., J.S.S.)
| | - Zilu Zhou
- Department of Health Policy, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee (Z.Z., J.A.G.)
| | - Jonathan S Schildcrout
- Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee (S.G., J.S.S.)
| | - John A Graves
- Department of Health Policy, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee (Z.Z., J.A.G.)
| | - Marc S Williams
- Department of Genomic Health, Geisinger, Danville, Pennsylvania (M.S.W.)
| | - Jing Hao
- Department of Genomic Health and Department of Population Health Sciences, Geisinger, Danville, Pennsylvania (J.H.)
| | - Laney K Jones
- Department of Population Health Sciences and Heart Institute, Geisinger, Danville, Pennsylvania (L.K.J.)
| | - Scott J Spencer
- Institute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (S.J.S.)
| | - Shangqing Jiang
- The CHOICE Institute, Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (G.F.G., S.J.)
| | - David L Veenstra
- The CHOICE Institute, Department of Pharmacy, and Institute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (D.L.V.)
| | - Josh F Peterson
- Department of Biomedical Informatics and Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee (J.F.P.)
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Schwartz ZP, Li AJ, Walsh CS, Rimel BJ, Alvarado MM, Lentz SE, Cass I. Patterns of care and outcomes of risk reducing surgery in women with pathogenic variants in non-BRCA and Lynch syndrome ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. Gynecol Oncol 2023; 173:1-7. [PMID: 37030072 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.03.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2022] [Revised: 03/22/2023] [Accepted: 03/23/2023] [Indexed: 04/10/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Guidelines recommend risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) for women with pathogenic variants of non-BRCA and Lynch syndrome-associated ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. Optimal timing and findings at the time of RRSO for these women remains unclear. We sought to characterize practice patterns and frequency of occult gynecologic cancers for these women at our two institutions. METHODS Women with germline ovarian cancer susceptibility gene pathogenic variants who underwent RRSO between 1/2000-9/2019 were reviewed in an IRB-approved study. All patients were asymptomatic with no suspicion for malignancy at time of RRSO. Clinico-pathologic characteristics were extracted from the medical records. RESULTS 26 Non-BRCA (9 BRIP1, 9 RAD51C, and 8 RAD51D) and 75 Lynch (36 MLH1, 18 MSH2, 21 MSH6) pathogenic variants carriers were identified. Median age at time of RRSO was 47. There were no occurrences of occult ovarian or fallopian tube cancer in either group. Two patients (3%) in the Lynch group had occult endometrial cancer. Median follow up was 18 and 35 months for non-BRCA and Lynch patients, respectively. No patient developed primary peritoneal cancer upon follow up. Post-surgical complications occurred in 9/101 (9%) of patients. Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) was rarely used despite reported post-menopausal symptoms in 6/25 (23%) and 7/75 (37%) patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS No occult ovarian or tubal cancers were observed in either group. No recurrent or primary gynecologic-related cancers occurred upon follow-up. Despite frequent menopausal symptoms, HRT use was rare. Both groups experienced surgical complications when hysterectomy and/or concurrent colon surgery was performed suggesting concurrent surgeries should only be performed when indicated.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zachary P Schwartz
- Kaiser Permanente Panorama City Medical Center, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, 13640 Roscoe Blvd., Panorama City, CA 91402, USA.
| | - Andrew J Li
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Samuel Oschin Cancer Center, 127 S. San Vicente Blvd., 7th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA.
| | - Christine S Walsh
- University of Colorado Cancer Center, 1665 Aurora Court, Aurora, CO 80045, USA.
| | - B J Rimel
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Samuel Oschin Cancer Center, 127 S. San Vicente Blvd., 7th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA.
| | - Monica M Alvarado
- Kaiser Permanente Southern California Regional Genetic Services, 393 E. Walnut St. 6 SW, Pasadena, CA 91188, USA.
| | - Scott E Lentz
- Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center, Gynecology Oncology Department, 4950 W., Sunset Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90027, USA.
| | - Ilana Cass
- Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1 Medical, Center Drive, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
McVeigh TP, Sweeney KJ, Brennan DJ, McVeigh UM, Ward S, Strydom A, Seal S, Astbury K, Donnellan P, Higgins J, Keane M, Kerin MJ, Malone C, McGough P, McLaughlin R, O'Leary M, Rushe M, Barry MK, MacGregor G, Sugrue M, Yousif A, Al-Azawi D, Berkeley E, Boyle TJ, Connolly EM, Nolan C, Richardson E, Giffney C, Doyle SB, Broderick S, Boyd W, McVey R, Walsh T, Farrell M, Gallagher DJ, Rahman N, George AJ. A pilot study investigating feasibility of mainstreaming germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing in high-risk patients with breast and/or ovarian cancer in three tertiary Cancer Centres in Ireland. Fam Cancer 2023; 22:135-149. [PMID: 36029389 DOI: 10.1007/s10689-022-00313-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2022] [Accepted: 08/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
In the Republic of Ireland (ROI), BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic testing has been traditionally undertaken in eligible individuals, after pre-test counselling by a Clinical Geneticist/Genetic Counsellor. Clinical Genetics services in ROI are poorly resourced, with routine waiting times for appointments at the time of this pilot often extending beyond a year. The consequent prolonged waiting times are unacceptable where therapeutic decision-making depends on the patient's BRCA status. "Mainstreaming" BRCA1/BRCA2 testing through routine oncology/surgical clinics has been implemented successfully in other centres in the UK and internationally. We aimed to pilot this pathway in three Irish tertiary centres. A service evaluation project was undertaken over a 6-month period between January and July 2017. Eligible patients, fulfilling pathology and age-based inclusion criteria defined by TGL clinical, were identified, and offered constitutional BRCA1/BRCA2 testing after pre-test counselling by treating clinicians. Tests were undertaken by TGL Clinical. Results were returned to clinicians by secure email. Onward referrals of patients with uncertain/pathogenic results, or suspicious family histories, to Clinical Genetics were made by the treating team. Surveys assessing patient and clinician satisfaction were sent to participating clinicians and a sample of participating patients. Data was collected with respect to diagnostic yield, turnaround time, onward referral rates, and patient and clinician feedback. A total of 101 patients underwent diagnostic germline BRCA1/BRCA2 tests through this pathway. Pathogenic variants were identified in 12 patients (12%). All patients in whom variants were identified were appropriately referred to Clinical Genetics. At least 12 additional patients with uninformative BRCA1/BRCA2 tests were also referred for formal assessment by Clinical Geneticist or Genetic Counsellor. Issues were noted in terms of time pressures and communication of results to patients. Results from a representative sample of participants completing the satisfaction survey indicated that the pathway was acceptable to patients and clinicians. Mainstreaming of constitutional BRCA1/BRCA2 testing guided by age- and pathology-based criteria is potentially feasible for patients with breast cancer as well as patients with ovarian cancer in Ireland.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Terri Patricia McVeigh
- Cancer Genetics Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
- Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
| | - Karl J Sweeney
- Saolta Health Care Group, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland
| | - Donal J Brennan
- Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
- The National Maternity Hospital, Holles St, Dublin, Ireland
| | | | - Simon Ward
- Cancer Genetics Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | | | | | - Katherine Astbury
- Saolta Health Care Group, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland
| | - Paul Donnellan
- Saolta Health Care Group, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland
| | - Joanne Higgins
- Saolta Health Care Group, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland
| | - Maccon Keane
- Saolta Health Care Group, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland
| | - Michael J Kerin
- Saolta Health Care Group, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland
- National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Carmel Malone
- Saolta Health Care Group, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland
- National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - Pauline McGough
- Saolta Health Care Group, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland
| | - Ray McLaughlin
- Saolta Health Care Group, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland
| | - Michael O'Leary
- Saolta Health Care Group, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland
| | - Margaret Rushe
- Saolta Health Care Group, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland
| | - Michael Kevin Barry
- Saolta Health Care Group, Mayo University Hospital, Co Mayo, Castlebar, Ireland
| | - Geraldine MacGregor
- Saolta University Health Care Group, Letterkenny University Hospital, Co Donegal, Letterkenny, Ireland
| | - Michael Sugrue
- Saolta University Health Care Group, Letterkenny University Hospital, Co Donegal, Letterkenny, Ireland
| | - Ala Yousif
- Saolta University Hospital Group, Sligo University Hospital, Sligo, Ireland
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - William Boyd
- Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Ruaidhri McVey
- Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Thomas Walsh
- Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | | | - David J Gallagher
- St James's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
- Mater Private Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | | | - Angela J George
- Cancer Genetics Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Lacaze P, Manchanda R, Green RC. Prioritizing the detection of rare pathogenic variants in population screening. Nat Rev Genet 2023; 24:205-206. [PMID: 36639513 DOI: 10.1038/s41576-022-00571-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Paul Lacaze
- Public Health Genomics, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, CRUK Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK
- Department of Health Services Research, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Robert C Green
- Mass General Brigham, Broad Institute, Ariadne Labs and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Kotnik U, Maver A, Peterlin B, Lovrecic L. Assessment of pathogenic variation in gynecologic cancer genes in a national cohort. Sci Rep 2023; 13:5307. [PMID: 37002323 PMCID: PMC10066348 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-32397-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2022] [Accepted: 03/27/2023] [Indexed: 04/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Population-based estimates of pathogenic variation burden in gynecologic cancer predisposition genes are a prerequisite for the development of effective precision public health strategies. This study aims to reveal the burden of pathogenic variants in a comprehensive set of clinically relevant breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancer genes in a large population-based study. We performed a rigorous manual classification procedure to identify pathogenic variants in a panel of 17 gynecologic cancer predisposition genes in a cohort of 7091 individuals, representing 0.35% of the general population. The population burden of pathogenic variants in hereditary gynecologic cancer-related genes in our study was 2.14%. Pathogenic variants in genes ATM, BRCA1, and CDH1 are significantly enriched and the burden of pathogenic variants in CHEK2 is decreased in our population compared to the control population. We have identified a high burden of pathogenic variants in several gynecologic cancer-related genes in the Slovenian population, most importantly in the BRCA1 gene.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Urška Kotnik
- Clinical Institute of Genomic Medicine, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
- Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
| | - Aleš Maver
- Clinical Institute of Genomic Medicine, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Borut Peterlin
- Clinical Institute of Genomic Medicine, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Luca Lovrecic
- Clinical Institute of Genomic Medicine, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Oh M, McBride A, Bhattacharjee S, Slack M, Jeter J, Abraham I. The economic value of knowing BRCA status: universal BRCA testing for breast cancer prevention. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2023; 23:309-316. [PMID: 36637419 DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2023.2169135] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aimed to estimate the incremental lifetime effects, costs, and net monetary benefit (NMB) of knowing BRCA information by universal genetic testing of all US women without breast cancer turning 40 in a given year, and the cumulative savings or losses of yearly cohort testing over 16 years. We compared two strategies: (1) 'with BRCA information' and (2) 'without BRCA information.' METHODS Incremental NMB (INMB) was calculated as the monetized benefit per person of knowing BRCA status. The net monetized value (cumulated INMB) of knowing BRCA information was estimated by multiplying the INMB with the eligible population or the year 2020 cohort of US women age 40 and extended for a total of 16 yearly cohorts. RESULTS Universal testing of the female population at the age of 40 in a given year provided aan INMB of $663/person (payer) and $1,006/person (society).Escalated to the U.S. population of women age 40 , knowing BRCA status resulted in lifetime cumulated INMB of $1.3 billion (payer) and $2.0 billion (society) for the 2020 cohort; and yielded accumulated monetized value of $18.3 billion (payer) and $27.6 billion (society) over 16 yearly cohorts of 40-year-old women. CONCLUSIONS The universal testing for BRCA status of all US women at age 40 provides compelling short-term and long-term economic value.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mok Oh
- Pharmacy Practice & Science Department, University of Arizona College of Pharmacy, Tucson, AZ, USA
| | - Ali McBride
- The University of Arizona Cancer Center, North Campus, Tucson, AZ, USA
| | - Sandipan Bhattacharjee
- Pharmacy Practice & Science Department, University of Arizona College of Pharmacy, Tucson, AZ, USA
| | - Marion Slack
- Pharmacy Practice & Science Department, University of Arizona College of Pharmacy, Tucson, AZ, USA.,Center for Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic Research, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
| | - Joanne Jeter
- University of Utah Health Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Ivo Abraham
- Center for Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic Research, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Oh M, McBride A, Bhattacharjee S, Slack M, Jeter J, Abraham I. The economic value of knowing BRCA status: BRCA testing for optimizing treatment in recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2023; 23:317-325. [PMID: 36691923 DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2023.2169136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aimed to estimate the incremental lifetime effects, costs, and net monetary benefit (NMB) of knowing BRCA information for recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC) patients in a given year and the cumulative savings of yearly hypothetical cohort testing over 16 years. We compared two strategies: (1) 'with BRCA information' and (2) 'without BRCA information.' METHODS Incremental NMB (INMB) was calculated as the average net monetized benefit of knowing BRCA status. The net monetized value (cumulative INMB) of knowing BRCA information was estimated by multiplying the INMB with the eligible ROC patients in year 2020 and extended for potential ROC patients over 16 yearly hypothetical cohorts of ROC patients. RESULTS Knowing BRCA information for ROC patients provided an additional monetized value of $3,528 in (payer) and $3,194 (society). Escalated to all ROC patients in the U.S. and future incidence ROC estimates, knowing BRCA information resulted in a lifetime cumulative INMB of $35.6 million (payer) and $32.2 million (society) for the 2020 cohort; and yielded an accumulated value of $97.3 million (payer) and $88.0 million (society) over 16 yearly hypothetical cohorts of ROC patients. CONCLUSIONS The economic value of knowing BRCA status of all U.S. ROC patients provides short-term and long-term evidence for optimizing treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mok Oh
- Department of Pharmacy Practice & Science, University of Arizona College of Pharmacy, Tucson, AZ, United States
| | - Ali McBride
- The University of Arizona Cancer Center, North Campus, AZ, USA
| | - Sandipan Bhattacharjee
- Department of Pharmacy Practice & Science, University of Arizona College of Pharmacy, Tucson, AZ, United States
| | - Marion Slack
- Department of Pharmacy Practice & Science, University of Arizona College of Pharmacy, Tucson, AZ, United States.,Center for Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic Research, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
| | - Joanne Jeter
- University of Utah Health Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, AZ, USA
| | - Ivo Abraham
- Center for Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomic Research, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Georgiou D, Monje-Garcia L, Miles T, Monahan K, Ryan NAJ. A Focused Clinical Review of Lynch Syndrome. Cancer Manag Res 2023; 15:67-85. [PMID: 36699114 PMCID: PMC9868283 DOI: 10.2147/cmar.s283668] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2022] [Accepted: 12/23/2022] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
Lynch syndrome (LS) is an autosomal dominant condition that increases an individual's risk of a constellation of cancers. LS is defined when an individual has inherited pathogenic variants in the mismatch repair genes. Currently, most people with LS are undiagnosed. Early detection of LS is vital as those with LS can be enrolled in cancer reduction strategies through chemoprophylaxis, risk reducing surgery and cancer surveillance. However, these interventions are often invasive and require refinement. Furthermore, not all LS associated cancers are currently amenable to surveillance. Historically only those with a strong family history suggestive of LS were offered testing; this has proved far too restrictive. New criteria for testing have recently been introduced including the universal screening for LS in associated cancers. This has increased the number of people being diagnosed with LS but has also brought about unique challenges such as when to consent for germline testing and questions over how and who should carry out the consent. The results of germline testing for LS can be complicated and the diagnostic pathway is not always clear. Furthermore, by testing only those with cancer for LS we fail to identify these individuals before they develop potentially fatal pathology. This review will outline these challenges and explore solutions. Furthermore, we consider the potential future of LS care and the related treatments and interventions which are the current focus of research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Demetra Georgiou
- Genomics and Personalised Medicine Service, Charing Cross Hospital, London, UK
| | - Laura Monje-Garcia
- The St Mark's Centre for Familial Intestinal Cancer Polyposis, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK.,School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, UK
| | - Tracie Miles
- South West Genomics Medicine Service Alliance, Bristol, UK
| | - Kevin Monahan
- The St Mark's Centre for Familial Intestinal Cancer Polyposis, St Mark's Hospital, London, UK.,Department of Gastroenterology, Imperial College, London, UK
| | - Neil A J Ryan
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.,The College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Kim ET, Jeong HE, Yoon HJ, Kim KH, Suh DS. Validation of multi-gene panel next-generation sequencing for the detection of BRCA mutation in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded epithelial ovarian cancer tissues. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2023; 62:66-70. [PMID: 36720553 DOI: 10.1016/j.tjog.2022.07.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/05/2022] [Indexed: 01/30/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The therapeutic effect of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) with somatic BRCA mutations is consistent with that observed in patients with germline BRCA mutations, indicating the importance of detecting both germline and somatic BRCA mutations concurrently. We compared the efficacy of multi-gene panel next generation sequencing (NGS) in EOC patients' formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue to that of conventional Sanger sequencing in blood samples. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study included 48 patients with EOC, and both blood Sanger sequencing and FFPE tissue NGS were conducted in all of them. Clinical and pathological data were reviewed, including age at diagnosis, histology, and stage. Blood Sanger sequencing was performed using peripheral blood leukocytes. The target regions of 90 cancer-related genes were identified using FFPE tissue. RESULTS The median age of patients was 56.1 years, with serous carcinoma (n = 40, 83.3%) and stage III (n = 37, 77.1%) being the most common histology and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, respectively. FFPE tissue NGS identified ten pathogenic variants, including all eight pathogenic variants identified by blood Sanger sequencing and two additional pathogenic variants. Furthermore, FFPE tissue NGS identified 19 variants of uncertain significance (VUS), including all ten VUS identified by blood Sanger sequencing and nine additional VUS. CONCLUSION The FFPE tissue multi-gene panel NGS had 100% sensitivity for detecting BRCA germline mutations and could detect additional somatic mutations. Furthermore, performing FFPE tissue multi-gene panel NGS followed by blood Sanger sequencing sequentially may help differentiate germline from somatic BRCA mutations for genetic counseling.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eun Taeg Kim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, South Korea
| | - Ha Eun Jeong
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, South Korea
| | - Hyung Joon Yoon
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, South Korea
| | - Ki Hyung Kim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, South Korea
| | - Dong Soo Suh
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, South Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Teppala S, Hodgkinson B, Hayes S, Scuffham P, Tuffaha H. A review of the cost-effectiveness of genetic testing for germline variants in familial cancer. J Med Econ 2023; 26:19-33. [PMID: 36426964 DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2022.2152233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Targeted germline testing is recommended for those with or at risk of breast, ovarian, or colorectal cancer. The affordability of genetic sequencing has improved over the past decade, therefore the cost-effectiveness of testing for these cancers is worthy of reassessment. OBJECTIVE To systematically review economic evaluations on cost-effectiveness of germline testing in breast, ovarian, or colorectal cancer. METHODS A search of PubMed and Embase databases for cost-effectiveness studies on germline testing in breast, ovarian, or colorectal cancer, published between 1999 and May 2022. Synthesis of methodology, cost-effectiveness, and reporting (CHEERS checklist) was performed. RESULTS The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; in 2021-adjusted US$) for germline testing versus the standard care option in hereditary breast or ovarian cancer (HBOC) across target settings were as follows: (1) population-wide testing: 344-2.5 million/QALY; (2) women with high-risk: dominant = 78,118/QALY, 8,337-59,708/LYG; (3) existing breast or ovarian cancer: 3,012-72,566/QALY, 39,835/LYG; and (4) metastatic breast cancer: 158,630/QALY. Likewise, ICERs of germline testing for colorectal cancer across settings were: (1) population-wide testing: 132,200/QALY, 1.1 million/LYG; (2) people with high-risk: 32,322-76,750/QALY, dominant = 353/LYG; and (3) patients with existing colorectal cancer: dominant = 54,122/QALY, 98,790-6.3 million/LYG. Key areas of underreporting were the inclusion of a health economic analysis plan (100% of HBOC and colorectal studies), engagement of patients and stakeholders (95.4% of HBOC, 100% of colorectal studies) and measurement of outcomes (18.2% HBOC, 38.9% of colorectal studies). CONCLUSION Germline testing for HBOC was likely to be cost-effective across most settings, except when used as a co-dependent technology with the PARP inhibitor, olaparib in metastatic breast cancer. In colorectal cancer studies, testing was cost-effective in those with high-risk, but inconclusive in other settings. Cost-effectiveness was sensitive to the prevalence of tested variants, cost of testing, uptake, and benefits of prophylactic measures. Policy advice on germline testing should emphasize the importance of these factors in their recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Srinivas Teppala
- Centre for Applied Health Economics, Griffith University, Nathan, Australia
| | - Brent Hodgkinson
- Centre for Applied Health Economics, Griffith University, Nathan, Australia
| | - Sandi Hayes
- Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Southport, Australia
| | - Paul Scuffham
- Centre for Applied Health Economics, Griffith University, Nathan, Australia
- Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Southport, Australia
| | - Haitham Tuffaha
- Centre for the Business and Economics of Health, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Real World Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Population Screening for BRCA Variants among Ashkenazi Jews Compared with Family History-Based Strategies. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14246113. [PMID: 36551598 PMCID: PMC9776581 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14246113] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2022] [Revised: 11/24/2022] [Accepted: 12/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
29
|
Negri S, De Ponti E, Sina FP, Sala E, Dell'Oro C, Roversi G, Lazzarin S, Delle Marchette M, Inzoli A, Toso C, Fumagalli S, Campanella M, Kotsopoulos J, Fruscio R. Evaluation of family history in individuals with heterozygous BRCA pathogenic variants diagnosed with breast or ovarian cancer in a single center in Italy. Mol Genet Genomic Med 2022; 10:e2071. [PMID: 36307994 PMCID: PMC9747548 DOI: 10.1002/mgg3.2071] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2022] [Revised: 09/28/2022] [Accepted: 09/30/2022] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations are responsible for 5% of breast cancer (BC) and 10-15% of ovarian cancer (EOC). The presence of a germline mutation and therefore the identification of subjects at high risk of developing cancer should ideally precede the onset of the disease, so that appropriate surveillance and risk-reducing treatments can be proposed. In this study, we revisited the family history (FH) of women who tested positive for BRCA mutations after being diagnosed with BC or EOC. METHODS The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®), and the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) guidelines were applied to the FH of 157 women who were referred to San Gerardo Hospital for genetic counseling. RESULTS Almost 85% of women had an FH of BRCA-related cancer. 63.7% and 52.2% of women could have undergone genetic testing according to NCCN and AIOM testing criteria (p < .05) before tumor diagnosis. An FH of EOC was the most frequent NCCN criterion, followed by BC diagnosed <45 years old. Sixty-five percent of deceased women could have undergone genetic testing before developing cancer. CONCLUSIONS FH is a powerful tool to identify high-risk individuals eligible for genetic counseling and testing. Testing of healthy individuals should be considered when an appropriately affected family member is unavailable for testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Serena Negri
- Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Elena De Ponti
- Department of Physical Medicine, ASST Monza, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy
| | | | - Elena Sala
- UO Medical Genetics, ASST Monza, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy
| | - Cristina Dell'Oro
- Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Gaia Roversi
- UO Medical Genetics, ASST Monza, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy
| | - Sara Lazzarin
- Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Martina Delle Marchette
- Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Alesssandra Inzoli
- Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Claudia Toso
- UOC Gestione Sanitaria delle Convenzioni, ATS Brianza, Lecco, Italy
| | - Simona Fumagalli
- Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Joanne Kotsopoulos
- Women's College Research Institute, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Robert Fruscio
- Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.,UOC Gynecologic Surgery, ASST Monza, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Torr B, Jones C, Choi S, Allen S, Kavanaugh G, Hamill M, Garrett A, MacMahon S, Loong L, Reay A, Yuan L, Valganon Petrizan M, Monson K, Perry N, Fallowfield L, Jenkins V, Gold R, Taylor A, Gabe R, Wiggins J, Lucassen A, Manchanda R, Gandhi A, George A, Hubank M, Kemp Z, Evans DG, Bremner S, Turnbull C. A digital pathway for genetic testing in UK NHS patients with cancer: BRCA-DIRECT randomised study internal pilot. J Med Genet 2022; 59:1179-1188. [PMID: 35868849 PMCID: PMC9691828 DOI: 10.1136/jmg-2022-108655] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2022] [Accepted: 07/03/2022] [Indexed: 01/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Germline genetic testing affords multiple opportunities for women with breast cancer, however, current UK NHS models for delivery of germline genetic testing are clinician-intensive and only a minority of breast cancer cases access testing. METHODS We designed a rapid, digital pathway, supported by a genetics specialist hotline, for delivery of germline testing of BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 (BRCA-testing), integrated into routine UK NHS breast cancer care. We piloted the pathway, as part of the larger BRCA-DIRECT study, in 130 unselected patients with breast cancer and gathered preliminary data from a randomised comparison of delivery of pretest information digitally (fully digital pathway) or via telephone consultation with a genetics professional (partially digital pathway). RESULTS Uptake of genetic testing was 98.4%, with good satisfaction reported for both the fully and partially digital pathways. Similar outcomes were observed in both arms regarding patient knowledge score and anxiety, with <5% of patients contacting the genetics specialist hotline. All progression criteria established for continuation of the study were met. CONCLUSION Pilot data indicate preliminary demonstration of feasibility and acceptability of a fully digital pathway for BRCA-testing and support proceeding to a full powered study for evaluation of non-inferiority of the fully digital pathway, detailed quantitative assessment of outcomes and operational economic analyses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN87845055.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bethany Torr
- Institute of Cancer Research, Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Sutton, UK
| | - Christopher Jones
- Clinical Trials Unit, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
| | - Subin Choi
- Institute of Cancer Research, Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Sutton, UK
| | - Sophie Allen
- Institute of Cancer Research, Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Sutton, UK
| | - Grace Kavanaugh
- Institute of Cancer Research, Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Sutton, UK
| | - Monica Hamill
- Institute of Cancer Research, Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Sutton, UK
| | - Alice Garrett
- Institute of Cancer Research, Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Sutton, UK
| | - Suzanne MacMahon
- Centre for Molecular Pathology, Institute of Cancer Research Sutton, Sutton, UK
| | - Lucy Loong
- Institute of Cancer Research, Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Sutton, UK
| | - Alistair Reay
- Centre for Molecular Pathology, Institute of Cancer Research Sutton, Sutton, UK
| | - Lina Yuan
- Centre for Molecular Pathology, Institute of Cancer Research Sutton, Sutton, UK
| | | | - Kathryn Monson
- Sussex Health Outcomes, Research and Education in Cancer (SHORE-C), Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
| | - Nicky Perry
- Clinical Trials Unit, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
| | - Lesley Fallowfield
- Sussex Health Outcomes, Research and Education in Cancer (SHORE-C), Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
| | - Valerie Jenkins
- Sussex Health Outcomes, Research and Education in Cancer (SHORE-C), Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
| | | | - Amy Taylor
- Clinical Genetics, East Anglian Medical Genetics Service, Cambridge, UK
| | - Rhian Gabe
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary's University of London, London, UK
| | - Jennifer Wiggins
- Cancer Genetics Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Anneke Lucassen
- Clinical Ethics and Law at Southampton (CELS), University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
- Department of Medicine, Univerity of Oxford Nuffield, Oxford, UK
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary's University of London, London, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
- Department of Health Services Research, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Ashu Gandhi
- School of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
- Prevent Breast Cancer Centre, Wythenshawe Hospital Manchester Universities Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Angela George
- Institute of Cancer Research, Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Sutton, UK
- Cancer Genetics Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Michael Hubank
- Centre for Molecular Pathology, Institute of Cancer Research Sutton, Sutton, UK
| | - Zoe Kemp
- Institute of Cancer Research, Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Sutton, UK
- Cancer Genetics Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - D Gareth Evans
- Nightingale and Genesis Breast Cancer Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
- Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Stephen Bremner
- Clinical Trials Unit, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
| | - Clare Turnbull
- Institute of Cancer Research, Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Sutton, UK
- Cancer Genetics Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Mighton C, Shickh S, Aguda V, Krishnapillai S, Adi-Wauran E, Bombard Y. From the patient to the population: Use of genomics for population screening. Front Genet 2022; 13:893832. [PMID: 36353115 PMCID: PMC9637971 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.893832] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2022] [Accepted: 09/26/2022] [Indexed: 10/22/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chloe Mighton
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Salma Shickh
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Vernie Aguda
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Centre for Medical Education, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom
| | - Suvetha Krishnapillai
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Ella Adi-Wauran
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Yvonne Bombard
- Genomics Health Services Research Program, St. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Lima SM, Nazareth M, Schmitt KM, Reyes A, Fleck E, Schwartz GK, Terry MB, Hillyer GC. Interest in genetic testing and risk-reducing behavioral changes: results from a community health assessment in New York City. J Community Genet 2022; 13:605-617. [PMID: 36227532 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-022-00610-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2022] [Accepted: 09/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Risk-based genetic tests are often used to determine cancer risk, when to initiate screening, and frequency of screening, but rely on interest in genetic testing. We examined overall interest in genetic testing for cancer risk assessment and willingness to change behavior, and whether these are affected by demographic or socioeconomic factors.We conducted a community needs health survey in 2019 among primary care and cancer patients, family members and community members in New York City. We used univariable analysis and relative risk regression to examine interest in genetic cancer risk testing and willingness to modify lifestyle behaviors in response to an informative genetic test.Of the 1225 participants, 74.0% (n = 906) expressed interest in having a genetic test to assess cancer risk. Interest in genetic testing was high across all demographic and socioeconomic groups; reported interest in genetic testing by group ranged from 65.0 (participants aged 65 years and older) to 83.6% (participants below federal poverty level). Among the 906 participants that reported interest in genetic testing, 79.6% were willing to change eating habits, 66.5% to change exercise habits, and 49.5% to lose weight in response to an informative genetic test result.Our study reveals that interest in genetic testing for cancer risk is high among patients and community members and is high across demographic and socioeconomic groups, as is the reported willingness to change behavior. Based on these results, we recommend that population-based genetic testing may result in greater reduction cancer risk, particularly among minoritized groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah M Lima
- Mailman School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Meaghan Nazareth
- Mailman School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Karen M Schmitt
- Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
- Division of Community and Population Health, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andria Reyes
- Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Elaine Fleck
- Division of Community and Population Health, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - Gary K Schwartz
- Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Mary Beth Terry
- Mailman School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
- Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Grace C Hillyer
- Mailman School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
- Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Whitworth PW, Beitsch PD, Patel R, Rosen B, Compagnoni G, Baron PL, Simmons R, Brown EA, Gold L, Holmes D, Smith LA, Kinney M, Grady I, Clark P, Barbosa K, Lyons S, Riley L, Coomer C, Curcio L, Ruiz A, Khan S, MacDonald H, Hughes K, Hardwick MK, Heald B, Munro SB, Nielsen SM, Esplin ED. Clinical Utility of Universal Germline Genetic Testing for Patients With Breast Cancer. JAMA Netw Open 2022; 5:e2232787. [PMID: 36136330 PMCID: PMC9500554 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.32787] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines currently recommend germline testing for high-risk genes in selected patients with breast cancer. The clinical utility of recommending testing all patients with breast cancer with multigene panels is currently under consideration. OBJECTIVE To examine the implications of universal testing of patients with breast cancer with respect to clinical decision-making. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Patients from a previously reported cohort were assessed as in-criteria or out-of-criteria according to the 2017 guidelines and underwent testing with a multigene germline panel between 2017 to 2018. Patients were women and men aged 18 to 90 years, with a new and/or previous diagnosis of breast cancer who had not undergone either single or multigene testing. Clinicians from 20 community and academic sites documented patient clinical information and changes to clinical recommendations made according to test findings. Association between prevalence of pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants and previously unreported clinical features, including scores generated by the BRCAPRO statistical model, was determined. Data were analyzed from April 2020 to May 2022. EXPOSURE New and/or previous diagnosis of breast cancer. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Disease management recommendations that were changed as a result of genetic testing results are reported. RESULTS Clinicians were asked to assess changes to clinical management as a result of germline genetic testing for 952 patients. Informative clinician-reported recommendations were provided for 939 (467 in-criteria and 472 out-of-criteria) of the patients with breast cancer (936 [99.7%] female; 702 [74.8%] White; mean [SD] age at initial diagnosis, 57.6 [11.5] years). One or more changes were reported for 31 of 37 (83.8%) in-criteria patients and 23 of 34 (67.6%) out-of-criteria patients with a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant. Recommendations were changed as a result of testing results for 14 of 22 (63.6%) out-of-criteria patients who had a variant in a breast cancer predisposition gene. Clinicians considered testing beneficial for two-thirds of patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants and for one-third of patients with either negative results or variants of uncertain significance. There was no difference in variant rate between patients meeting the BRCAPRO threshold (≥10%) and those who did not (P = .86, Fisher exact test). No changes to clinical recommendations were made for most patients with negative results (345 of 349 patients [98.9%]) or variants of uncertain significance (492 of 509 patients [96.7%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cohort study, germline genetic testing was used by clinicians to direct treatment for most out-of-criteria patients with breast cancer with pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants, including those with moderate-risk variants. Universal germline testing informs clinical decision-making and provides access to targeted treatments and clinical trials for all patients with breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pat W. Whitworth
- Nashville Breast Center, Nashville, Tennesee
- TME Breast Care Network, Dallas, Texas
| | - Peter D. Beitsch
- TME Breast Care Network, Dallas, Texas
- Invitae, San Francisco, California
| | - Rakesh Patel
- TME Breast Care Network, Dallas, Texas
- Invitae, San Francisco, California
| | | | | | | | - Rache Simmons
- Department of Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York
| | - Eric A. Brown
- Comprehensive Breast Care, A Division of Michigan Healthcare Professionals, Troy
| | - Linsey Gold
- Comprehensive Breast Care, A Division of Michigan Healthcare Professionals, Troy
| | | | | | - Michael Kinney
- Center for Advanced Breast Care, Arlington Heights, Illinois
| | - Ian Grady
- North Valley Breast Clinic, Redding, California
| | - Patricia Clark
- Ironwood Cancer and Research Centers, Scottsdale, Arizona
| | | | | | - Lee Riley
- St Luke’s University Health Network, Easton, Pennsylvania
| | - Cynara Coomer
- Department of Surgery, Northwell Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, New York
| | | | - Antonio Ruiz
- Chesapeake Regional Medical Center, Chesapeake, Virginia
| | - Sadia Khan
- Hoag Hospital Newport Beach, Newport Beach, California
| | | | - Kevin Hughes
- Department of Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
34
|
Manchanda R, Sideris M. Population based genetic testing for cancer susceptibility genes: quo vadis. BJOG 2022; 130:125-130. [PMID: 36017754 PMCID: PMC10087260 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.17283] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2022] [Revised: 07/23/2022] [Accepted: 08/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Cancer Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK.,Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NH Trust, EC1A 7BE, London, UK.,Department of Health Services Research and Policy, School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH, London, UK.,Department of Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - Michail Sideris
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Cancer Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK.,Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NH Trust, EC1A 7BE, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Jürgens H, Roht L, Leitsalu L, Nõukas M, Palover M, Nikopensius T, Reigo A, Kals M, Kallak K, Kütner R, Budrikas K, Kuusk S, Valvere V, Laidre P, Toome K, Rekker K, Tooming M, Ülle Murumets, Kahre T, Kruuv-Käo K, Õunap K, Padrik P, Metspalu A, Esko T, Fischer K, Tõnisson N. Precise, Genotype-First Breast Cancer Prevention: Experience With Transferring Monogenic Findings From a Population Biobank to the Clinical Setting. Front Genet 2022; 13:881100. [PMID: 35938029 PMCID: PMC9355130 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.881100] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2022] [Accepted: 06/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Although hereditary breast cancer screening and management are well accepted and established in clinical settings, these efforts result in the detection of only a fraction of genetic predisposition at the population level. Here, we describe our experience from a national pilot study (2018–2021) in which 180 female participants of Estonian biobank (of >150,000 participants in total) were re-contacted to discuss personalized clinical prevention measures based on their genetic predisposition defined by 11 breast cancer–related genes. Our results show that genetic risk variants are relatively common in the average-risk Estonian population. Seventy-five percent of breast cancer cases in at-risk subjects occurred before the age of 50 years. Only one-third of subjects would have been eligible for clinical screening according to the current criteria. The participants perceived the receipt of genetic risk information as valuable. Fluent cooperation of project teams supported by state-of-art data management, quality control, and secure transfer can enable the integration of research results to everyday medical practice in a highly efficient, timely, and well-accepted manner. The positive experience in this genotype-first breast cancer study confirms the value of using existing basic genomic data from population biobanks for precise prevention.
Collapse
|
36
|
Roberts MC, Foss KS, Henderson GE, Powell SN, Saylor KW, Weck KE, Milko LV. Public Interest in Population Genetic Screening for Cancer Risk. Front Genet 2022; 13:886640. [PMID: 35938028 PMCID: PMC9354961 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.886640] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2022] [Accepted: 06/06/2022] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
An emerging role for DNA sequencing is to identify people at risk for an inherited cancer syndrome in order to prevent or ameliorate the manifestation of symptoms. Two cancer syndromes, Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer and Lynch Syndrome meet the “Tier 1” evidence threshold established by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for routine testing of patients with a personal or family history of cancer. Advancements in genomic medicine have accelerated public health pilot programs for these highly medically actionable conditions. In this brief report, we provide descriptive statistics from a survey of 746 US respondents from a Qualtrics panel about the public’s awareness of genetic testing, interest in learning about their cancer risk, and likelihood of participating in a population genetic screening (PGS) test. Approximately of half the respondents were aware of genetic testing for inherited cancer risk (n = 377/745, 50.6%) and would choose to learn about their cancer risk (n-309/635, 48.7%). Characteristics of those interested in learning about their cancer risk differed by educational attainment, age, income, insurance status, having a primary care doctor, being aware of genetic testing, and likelihood of sharing information with family (p < 0.05). A sizeable majority of the respondents who were interested in about learning their cancer risk also said that they were likely to participate in a PGS test that involved a clinical appointment and blood draw, but no out-of-pocket cost (n = 255/309, 82.5%). Reasons for not wanting to participate included not finding test results interesting or important, concerns about costs, and feeling afraid to know the results. Overall, our results suggest that engaging and educating the general population about the benefits of learning about an inherited cancer predisposition may be an important strategy to address recruitment barriers to PGS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Megan C Roberts
- Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Kimberly S Foss
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Gail E Henderson
- Department of Social Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Sabrina N Powell
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Katherine W Saylor
- Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Karen E Weck
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Laura V Milko
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Gynecologic Cancer Risk and Genetics: Informing an Ideal Model of Gynecologic Cancer Prevention. Curr Oncol 2022; 29:4632-4646. [PMID: 35877228 PMCID: PMC9322111 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29070368] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2022] [Revised: 06/09/2022] [Accepted: 06/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Individuals with proven hereditary cancer syndrome (HCS) such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 have elevated rates of ovarian, breast, and other cancers. If these high-risk people can be identified before a cancer is diagnosed, risk-reducing interventions are highly effective and can be lifesaving. Despite this evidence, the vast majority of Canadians with HCS are unaware of their risk. In response to this unmet opportunity for prevention, the British Columbia Gynecologic Cancer Initiative convened a research summit “Gynecologic Cancer Prevention: Thinking Big, Thinking Differently” in Vancouver, Canada on 26 November 2021. The aim of the conference was to explore how hereditary cancer prevention via population-based genetic testing could decrease morbidity and mortality from gynecologic cancer. The summit invited local, national, and international experts to (1) discuss how genetic testing could be more broadly implemented in a Canadian system, (2) identify key research priorities in this topic and (3) outline the core essential elements required for such a program to be successful. This report summarizes the findings from this research summit, describes the current state of hereditary genetic programs in Canada, and outlines incremental steps that can be taken to improve prevention for high-risk Canadians now while developing an organized population-based hereditary cancer strategy.
Collapse
|
38
|
Raz A, Timmermans S, Eyal G, Brothers K, Minari J. Challenges for precision public health communication in the era of genomic medicine. Genet Med 2022; 24:1814-1820. [PMID: 35657379 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2022.05.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2021] [Revised: 05/12/2022] [Accepted: 05/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Although still in the early stages of development, the advent of fast, high-output, and cost-effective next-generation DNA sequencing technology is moving precision medicine into public health. Before this shift toward next-generation sequencing in public health settings, individual patients met geneticists after showing symptoms and through limited family screening. In the new era of precision public health, everyone is a possible participant in genetic sequencing, simply by being born (newborn screening), by donating blood (biobanking), or through population screening. These initiatives are increasingly offered to individuals throughout their life and more individuals are encountering opportunities to use DNA sequencing. This article raises awareness of these growing areas and calls for different models of public engagement and communication about genomics, including screening asymptomatic populations, obtaining consent for unspecified and unforeseen future uses of genomic data, and managing variants of uncertain significance. Given that such communication challenges loom large, established norms of practice in genomic medicine and research should be reconsidered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aviad Raz
- Department of Sociology & Anthropology, Ben-Gurion University of the Nagev, Beersheba, Israel.
| | | | - Gil Eyal
- Precision Medicine & Society Program, Department of Sociology, Columbia University, New York, NY
| | - Kyle Brothers
- Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY
| | - Jusaku Minari
- Uehiro Research Division for iPS Cell Ethics, Center for iPS Cell Research and Application (CiRA), Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Gaba F, Oxley S, Liu X, Yang X, Chandrasekaran D, Kalsi J, Antoniou A, Side L, Sanderson S, Waller J, Ahmed M, Wallace A, Wallis Y, Menon U, Jacobs I, Legood R, Marks D, Manchanda R. Unselected Population Genetic Testing for Personalised Ovarian Cancer Risk Prediction: A Qualitative Study Using Semi-Structured Interviews. Diagnostics (Basel) 2022; 12:1028. [PMID: 35626184 PMCID: PMC9139231 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12051028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2022] [Revised: 04/11/2022] [Accepted: 04/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Faiza Gaba
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Old Anatomy Building, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (F.G.); (S.O.); (X.L.); (D.C.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London EC1A 7BE, UK
| | - Samuel Oxley
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Old Anatomy Building, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (F.G.); (S.O.); (X.L.); (D.C.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London EC1A 7BE, UK
| | - Xinting Liu
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Old Anatomy Building, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (F.G.); (S.O.); (X.L.); (D.C.)
| | - Xin Yang
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, The University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK; (X.Y.); (A.A.)
| | - Dhivya Chandrasekaran
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Old Anatomy Building, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (F.G.); (S.O.); (X.L.); (D.C.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London EC1A 7BE, UK
| | - Jatinderpal Kalsi
- Department of Women’s Cancer, University College London, Gower St, Bloomsbury, London WC1E 6BT, UK;
| | - Antonis Antoniou
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, The University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK; (X.Y.); (A.A.)
| | - Lucy Side
- Department of Clinical Genetics, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Tremona Rd, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK;
| | - Saskia Sanderson
- Early Disease Detection Research Project UK (EDDRP UK), 2 Redman Place, London E20 1JQ, UK;
| | - Jo Waller
- Cancer Prevention Group, King’s College London, Great Maze Pond, London SE1 9RT, UK;
| | - Munaza Ahmed
- North East Thames Regional Genetics Unit, Department Clinical Genetics, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London WC1N 3JH, UK;
| | - Andrew Wallace
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, 6th Floor Saint Marys Hospital, Oxford Rd, Manchester M13 9WL, UK;
| | - Yvonne Wallis
- West Midlands Regional Genetics Laboratory, Birmingham Women’s NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham B15 2TG, UK;
| | - Usha Menon
- Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, 90 High Holborn, London WC1V 6LJ, UK;
| | - Ian Jacobs
- Department of Women’s Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, Australia;
| | - Rosa Legood
- Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK; (R.L.); (D.M.)
| | - Dalya Marks
- Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK; (R.L.); (D.M.)
| | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Old Anatomy Building, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK; (F.G.); (S.O.); (X.L.); (D.C.)
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London EC1A 7BE, UK
- Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, 90 High Holborn, London WC1V 6LJ, UK;
- Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK; (R.L.); (D.M.)
- Department of Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi 110029, India
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Hull LE, Natarajan P. Self-rated family health history knowledge among All of Us program participants. Genet Med 2022; 24:955-961. [PMID: 35058155 PMCID: PMC8995381 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2021.12.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2021] [Revised: 12/12/2021] [Accepted: 12/14/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Disparities in access to genetics services are well-documented. Family health history is routinely used to determine whether patients should be screened for heritable conditions. We sought to explore variation in levels of self-rated family health history knowledge as a possible contributer to this disparity. METHODS We performed a cross-sectional analysis of survey data from the All of Us Research Program. We compared the characteristics of participants who reported "None," "Some", and "A lot" of family health history knowledge using multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS Self-rated family health history data were available for 116,799 participants. A minority of survey participants (37%) endorsed "A lot" of knowledge about their family health history (n = 43,661). Most participants (60%) endorsed "Some" family health history knowledge (n = 69,914) and 3% (n = 3224) endorsed "None." In adjusted analyses, those who indicated "Some" family health history knowledge or "None" were more likely to be assigned male sex at birth, identify as possible gender and sexual minorities, have a self-reported race other than White, have a lower household annual income (<$25,000), or report lower educational attainment ( CONCLUSION Family health history knowledge may be limited, especially among traditionally underserved populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leland E Hull
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
| | - Pradeep Natarajan
- Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Cardiovascular Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Program in Medical and Population Genetics and Cardiovascular Disease Initiative, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA.
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
de la Haba-Rodriguez J, Lloret FF, Salgado MAV, Arce MO, Gutiérrez AC, Jiménez JGD, Zambrano CB, Alonso RMR, López RL, Salas NR. SEOM-GETTHI clinical guideline for the practical management of molecular platforms (2021). Clin Transl Oncol 2022; 24:693-702. [PMID: 35362851 PMCID: PMC8986692 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-022-02817-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/22/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
The improvement of molecular alterations in cancer as well as the development of technology has allowed us to bring closer to clinical practice the determination of molecular alterations in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. The use of multidetermination platforms is spreading in most Spanish hospitals. The objective of these clinical practice guides is to review their usefulness, and establish usage guidelines that guide their incorporation into clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juan de la Haba-Rodriguez
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofia, Instituto Maimonides de Investigacion Biomedica, Universidad de Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain
| | | | | | - Martín Oré Arce
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Marina Baixa de Villajoyosa, Alicante, Spain
| | - Ana Cardeña Gutiérrez
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Nuestra Señora de la Candelaria, Tenerife, Spain
| | | | - Carmen Beato Zambrano
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario de Jerez de la Frontera, Cádiz, Spain
| | | | - Rafael López López
- Department of Medical Oncology, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago, La Coruña, Spain
| | - Nuria Rodriguez Salas
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital La Paz, P de la Castellana, 261 - 28046, Madrid, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Simões Corrêa Galendi J, Kautz-Freimuth S, Stock S, Müller D. Uptake Rates of Risk-Reducing Surgeries for Women at Increased Risk of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Applied to Cost-Effectiveness Analyses: A Scoping Systematic Review. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14071786. [PMID: 35406563 PMCID: PMC8997187 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14071786] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2021] [Revised: 03/23/2022] [Accepted: 03/26/2022] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary For women who have tested positive for BRCA mutations, the decision to make use of preventive surgical options, such as risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) or risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO), depends on the women’s personal preferences and the cultural/social context. Among others, the cost-effectiveness of RRM and RRSO can be affected by the uptake rate of these preventive surgical options. Uptake rates of surgery should be given more attention in the conceptualization of health economic modeling studies for RRM and RRSO. Prospective multicenter studies are recommended to reflect regional and national variations in women’s preferences for preventive surgery. Abstract The cost-effectiveness of genetic screen-and-treat strategies for women at increased risk for breast and ovarian cancer often depends on the women’s willingness to make use of risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) or salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). To explore the uptake rates of RRM and RRSO applied in health economic modeling studies and the impact of uptake rates on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), we conducted a scoping literature review. In addition, using our own model, we conducted a value of information (VOI) analysis. Among the 19 models included in the review, the uptake rates of RRM ranged from 6% to 47% (RRSO: 10% to 88%). Fifty-seven percent of the models applied retrospective data obtained from registries, hospital records, or questionnaires. According to the models’ deterministic sensitivity analyses, there is a clear trend that a lower uptake rate increased the ICER and vice versa. Our VOI analysis showed high decision uncertainty associated with the uptake rates. In the future, uptake rates should be given more attention in the conceptualization of health economic modeling studies. Prospective studies are recommended to reflect regional and national variations in women’s preferences for preventive surgery.
Collapse
|
43
|
Jakuboski SH, McDonald JA, Terry MB. Do current family history-based genetic testing guidelines contribute to breast cancer health inequities? NPJ Breast Cancer 2022; 8:36. [PMID: 35319016 PMCID: PMC8941019 DOI: 10.1038/s41523-022-00391-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2021] [Accepted: 01/11/2022] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Prior to the recommended age for population-based breast cancer screening by mammography, which ranges from 40−50 years depending on guidelines, the main way to identify higher risk women for earlier breast cancer (BC) screening to improve outcomes and discuss targeted chemoprevention is through specific clinical guidelines which are largely based on family history of breast cancer and known mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes. The annual percent change (APC) in early-onset BC continues to rise, with the higher early-onset cancer burden and mortality continuing to be seen in non-Hispanic black (NHB) women compared to non-Hispanic white (NHW) women. Coupled with the increasing incidence overall as well as the lower percent of BC family history reported in NHB women compared with that of NHW women means that continued reliance on guidelines to identify women for genetic screening and initiation of early BC screening based largely on family history could lead to even greater BC health inequities. The similarity in the prevalence of mutations in key BC susceptibility genes between NHB and NHW women contrasts sharply to the differences in age-specific incidence rates between NHB and NHW women, supporting that there must be environmental modifiers that are contributing to the increased incidence in NHB women. This reality further argues for identifying NHB women early in adulthood through genetic testing who may benefit from tailored BC risk-reduction programs and early BC screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jasmine A McDonald
- Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, 10032, USA.,Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, 10032, USA
| | - Mary Beth Terry
- Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, 10032, USA. .,Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Baughan SL, Darwiche F, Tainsky MA. Functional Analysis of ATM variants in a high risk cohort provides insight into missing heritability. Cancer Genet 2022; 264-265:40-49. [DOI: 10.1016/j.cancergen.2022.03.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2021] [Revised: 03/18/2022] [Accepted: 03/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
45
|
Andoni T, Wiggins J, Robinson R, Charlton R, Sandberg M, Eeles R. Half of germline pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants found on panel tests do not fulfil NHS testing criteria. Sci Rep 2022; 12:2507. [PMID: 35190596 PMCID: PMC8861039 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-06376-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2021] [Accepted: 01/20/2022] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Genetic testing for cancer predisposition has been curtailed by the cost of sequencing, and testing has been restricted by eligibility criteria. As the cost of sequencing decreases, the question of expanding multi-gene cancer panels to a broader population arises. We evaluated how many additional actionable genetic variants are returned by unrestricted panel testing in the private sector compared to those which would be returned by adhering to current NHS eligibility criteria. We reviewed 152 patients referred for multi-gene cancer panels in the private sector between 2014 and 2016. Genetic counselling and disclosure of all results was standard of care provided by the Consultant. Every panel conducted was compared to current eligibility criteria. A germline pathogenic / likely pathogenic variant (P/LP), in a gene relevant to the personal or family history of cancer, was detected in 15 patients (detection rate of 10%). 46.7% of those found to have the P/LP variants (7 of 15), or 4.6% of the entire set (7 of 152), did not fulfil NHS eligibility criteria. 46.7% of P/LP variants in this study would have been missed by national testing guidelines, all of which were actionable. However, patients who do not fulfil eligibility criteria have a higher Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) burden. We demonstrated that the current England NHS threshold for genetic testing is missing pathogenic variants which would alter management in 4.6%, nearly 1 in 20 individuals. However, the clinical service burden that would ensue is a detection of VUS of 34%.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tala Andoni
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
| | | | - Rachel Robinson
- Leeds Genetics Laboratory, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - Ruth Charlton
- Leeds Genetics Laboratory, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Johnson K, Saylor KW, Guynn I, Hicklin K, Berg JS, Lich KH. A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders. Genet Med 2022; 24:262-288. [PMID: 34906467 PMCID: PMC8900524 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2021.10.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2021] [Accepted: 10/13/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Understanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement. METHODS We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist. RESULTS Across the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis. CONCLUSION We describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karl Johnson
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Katherine W Saylor
- Department of Public Policy, College of Arts and Sciences, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Isabella Guynn
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Karen Hicklin
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Jonathan S Berg
- Department of Genetics, School of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Kristen Hassmiller Lich
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Shen L, Zhang S, Wang K, Wang X. Familial Breast Cancer: Disease Related Gene Mutations and Screening Strategies for Chinese Population. Front Oncol 2021; 11:740227. [PMID: 34926254 PMCID: PMC8671637 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.740227] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2021] [Accepted: 11/12/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND About 5%-10% of the breast cancer cases have a hereditary background, and this subset is referred to as familial breast cancer (FBC). In this review, we summarize the susceptibility genes and genetic syndromes associated with FBC and discuss the FBC screening and high-risk patient consulting strategies for the Chinese population. METHODS We searched the PubMed database for articles published between January 2000 and August 2021. Finally, 380 pieces of literature addressing the genes and genetic syndromes related to FBC were included and reviewed. RESULTS We identified 16 FBC-related genes and divided them into three types (high-, medium-, and low-penetrance) of genes according to their relative risk ratios. In addition, six genetic syndromes were found to be associated with FBC. We then summarized the currently available screening strategies for FBC and discussed those available for high-risk Chinese populations. CONCLUSION Multiple gene mutations and genetic disorders are closely related to FBC. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend corresponding screening strategies for these genetic diseases. However, such guidelines for the Chinese population are still lacking. For screening high-risk groups in the Chinese population, genetic testing is recommended after genetic counseling.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Xiaochen Wang
- Department of Breast Surgery and Oncology, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Intervention, Ministry of Education, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Heterogeneity in how women value risk-stratified breast screening. Genet Med 2021; 24:146-156. [PMID: 34906505 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2021.09.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2020] [Revised: 07/04/2021] [Accepted: 09/10/2021] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Risk-stratified screening has potential to improve the cost effectiveness of national breast cancer screening programs. This study aimed to inform a socially acceptable and equitable implementation framework by determining what influences a woman's decision to accept a personalized breast cancer risk assessment and what the relative impact of these key determinants is. METHODS Multicriteria decision analysis was used to elicit the relative weights for 8 criteria that women reported influenced their decision. Preference heterogeneity was explored through cluster analysis. RESULTS The 2 criteria valued most by the 347 participants related to program access, "Mode of invitation" and "Testing process". Both criteria significantly influenced participation (P < .001). A total of 73% preferred communication by letter/online. Almost all women preferred a multidisease risk assessment with potential for a familial high-risk result. Four preference-based subgroups were identified. Membership to the largest subgroup was predicted by lower educational attainment, and women in this subgroup were concerned with program access. Higher relative perceived breast cancer risk predicted membership to the smallest subgroup that was focused on test parameters, namely "Scope of test" and "Test specificity". CONCLUSION Overall, Australian women would accept a personalized multidisease risk assessment, but when aligning with their preferences, it will necessitate a focus on program access and the development of online communication frameworks.
Collapse
|
49
|
Bernstein-Molho R, Evron E, Yerushalmi R, Paluch-Shimon S. Genetic testing in patients with triple-negative or hereditary breast cancer. Curr Opin Oncol 2021; 33:584-590. [PMID: 34474437 DOI: 10.1097/cco.0000000000000784] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW In recent years there has been a dramatic evolution in the clinical utility of genetic testing with expanding therapeutic implications for individuals with breast cancer who harbor a germline mutation in BRCA1/2. As these therapeutic opportunities expand and evolve, this requires the clinical and research community to rethink the approach to genetic testing for individuals with breast cancer. RECENT FINDINGS Genetic testing is evolving from traditional testing models based on pretest counseling with the aim of identifying hereditary and individual risk for purposes of screening and risk reduction to contemporary models that utilize technology to improve accessibility and oncology led mainstreaming of testing where the oncologist refers for genetic testing, discloses the results and formal counseling occurs later in the process than in traditional models. The cost and accessibility to multigene panel testing have resulted in broad uptake despite the fact that clinical utility and appropriate interpretation of results are not yet well established. Furthermore, somatic testing for genomic alterations may also yield results beyond the disease with detection of germline mutations impacting the individual and their family more broadly than anticipated. SUMMARY With the establishment of poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors as part of the treatment armamentarium for early and advanced breast cancer, paradigms, algorithms, and resources for genetic testing need to rapidly change in order to adapt to the evolution of germline mutations from hereditary and individual risk predictors to predictive therapeutic biomarkers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rinat Bernstein-Molho
- Susanne Levy Gertner Oncogenetics Unit, The Danek Gertner Institute of Human Genetics, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer.,Sackler School of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv
| | - Ella Evron
- Department of Oncology, Kaplan Medical Center, Rehovot.,Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Rinat Yerushalmi
- Institute of Oncology, Davidoff Cancer Center, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Hospital, Petah Tikva.,Sackler School of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv
| | - Shani Paluch-Shimon
- Sharett Institute of Oncology, Hadassah University Hospital, Jerusalem.,Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Mühlberger N, Sroczynski G, Gogollari A, Jahn B, Pashayan N, Steyerberg E, Widschwendter M, Siebert U. Cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening and prevention: a systematic review with a focus on risk-adapted strategies. THE EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS : HEPAC : HEALTH ECONOMICS IN PREVENTION AND CARE 2021; 22:1311-1344. [PMID: 34342797 DOI: 10.1007/s10198-021-01338-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2020] [Accepted: 06/10/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Benefit and cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening are still matters of controversy. Risk-adapted strategies are proposed to improve its benefit-harm and cost-benefit relations. Our objective was to perform a systematic review on economic breast cancer models evaluating primary and secondary prevention strategies in the European health care setting, with specific focus on model results, model characteristics, and risk-adapted strategies. METHODS Literature databases were systematically searched for economic breast cancer models evaluating the cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening and prevention strategies in the European health care context. Characteristics, methodological details and results of the identified studies are reported in evidence tables. Economic model outputs are standardized to achieve comparable cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS Thirty-two economic evaluations of breast cancer screening and seven evaluations of primary breast cancer prevention were included. Five screening studies and none of the prevention studies considered risk-adapted strategies. Studies differed in methodologic features. Only about half of the screening studies modeled overdiagnosis-related harms, most often indirectly and without reporting their magnitude. All models predict gains in life expectancy and/or quality-adjusted life expectancy at acceptable costs. However, risk-adapted screening was shown to be more effective and efficient than conventional screening. CONCLUSIONS Economic models suggest that breast cancer screening and prevention are cost effective in the European setting. All screening models predict gains in life expectancy, which has not yet been confirmed by trials. European models evaluating risk-adapted screening strategies are rare, but suggest that risk-adapted screening is more effective and efficient than conventional screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikolai Mühlberger
- Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Eduard-Wallnoefer-Zentrum I, 6060, Hall i.T, Austria
| | - Gaby Sroczynski
- Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Eduard-Wallnoefer-Zentrum I, 6060, Hall i.T, Austria
| | - Artemisa Gogollari
- Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Eduard-Wallnoefer-Zentrum I, 6060, Hall i.T, Austria
| | - Beate Jahn
- Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Eduard-Wallnoefer-Zentrum I, 6060, Hall i.T, Austria
| | - Nora Pashayan
- Institute of Epidemiology and Healthcare, Department of Applied Health Research, UCL-University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK
| | - Ewout Steyerberg
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, PO Box 9600, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Martin Widschwendter
- Department of Women's Cancer, EGA Institute for Women's Health, UCL - University College London, 74 Huntley St, Rm 340, London, WC1E 6AU, UK
| | - Uwe Siebert
- Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Eduard-Wallnoefer-Zentrum I, 6060, Hall i.T, Austria.
- Division of Health Technology Assessment and Bioinformatics, ONCOTYROL - Center for Personalized Cancer Medicine, Innsbruck, Austria.
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Center for Health Decision Science, Boston, MA, USA.
- Harvard Medical School, Institute for Technology Assessment and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|