Practical Methods for Integrating Genetic Testing Into Clinical Practice for Advanced Prostate Cancer

Genetic Signatures for Distinguishing Chemo-Sensitive from Chemo-Resistant Responders in Prostate Cancer Patients

Prostate cancer remains a significant public health concern in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly impacting South Africa with high mortality rates. Despite many years of extensive research and significant financial expenditure, there has yet to be a definitive solution to prostate cancer. It is not just individuals who vary in their response to treatment, but even different nodules within the same tumor exhibit unique transcriptome patterns. These distinctions extend beyond mere differences in gene expression levels to encompass the control and networking of individual genes. Escalating chemotherapy resistance in prostate cancer patients has prompted increased research into its underlying mechanisms. The heterogeneous nature of transcriptomic organization among men makes the pursuit of universal biomarkers and one-size-fits-all treatments impractical. This study delves into the expression of drug resistance-associated genes, ABCB1 and CYP1B1, in cancer cells. Employing bioinformatics, we explored the molecular pathways and cascades linked to drug resistance following upregulation of these genes. Samples were obtained from archived prostate cancer patient specimens through pre-treatment biopsies of two categories: good vs. poor responders, with cDNAs synthesized from isolated RNAs subjected to qPCR analysis. The results revealed increased ABCB1 and CYP1B1 expression in tumor samples of the poor responders. Gene enrichment and network analysis associated ABCB1 with ABC transporters and LncRNA-mediated therapeutic resistance (WP3672), while CYP1B1 was linked to ovarian steroidogenesis, tryptophan metabolism, steroid hormone biosynthesis, benzo(a)pyrene metabolism, the sulindac metabolic pathway, and the estrogen receptor pathway, which are associated with drug resistance. Both ABCB1 and CYP1B1 correlated with microRNAs in cancer and the Nuclear Receptors Meta-Pathway. STRING analysis predicted protein-protein interactions of ABCB1 and CYP1B1 with Glutathione S-transferase Pi, Catechol O-methyltransferase, UDP-glucuronosyltransferase 1-6, Leucine-rich Transmembrane and O-methyltransferase (LRTOMT), and Epoxide hydrolase 1, with scores of 0.973, 0.971, 0.966, 0.966, and 0.966, respectively. Furthermore, molecular docking analysis of the chemotherapy drug, docetaxel, with CYP1B1 and ABCB1 revealed robust molecular interactions, with binding energies of -20.37 and -15.25 Kcal/mol, respectively. These findings underscore the susceptibility of cancer patients to drug resistance due to increased ABCB1 and CYP1B1 expression in tumor samples from patients in the poor-responders category that affects associated molecular pathways. The potent molecular interactions of ABCB1 and CYP1B1 with docetaxel further emphasize the potential basis for chemotherapy resistance.

Mainstream Model of Genetic Testing for Prostate Cancer at a Large Tertiary Cancer Centre

BACKGROUND

An estimated 20% to 30% of men with advanced prostate cancer carry a mutation in DNA damage repair genes, of which half are estimated to be germline. Eligibility criteria for germline genetic testing expanded significantly for Ontario patients in May 2021 and many centers adopted a "mainstream" model, defined as oncologist-initiated genetic testing.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review to report on the first-year mainstream experience of a large tertiary oncologic center, the Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre. All patients who underwent mainstream at the discretion of their treating physician were included. A subset underwent somatic profiling as part of clinical trial screening. Descriptive statistics were used to report baseline clinicopathologic characteristics and treatments received.

RESULTS

Between May 1, 2021, and May 30, 2022, 174 patients with prostate cancer underwent mainstream germline genetic testing with a 19-gene panel. Median age was 75 (IQR 68-80), and 82% of patients were diagnosed with either de novo metastatic or high-risk localized prostate adenocarcinoma. Fourteen patients (8%; 95% CI 4%-12%) were found to have a deleterious germline mutation, including pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2, ATM, CHEK2, PMS2, RAD51C, HOXB13, and BRIP1. Forty-nine patients (28%; 95% CI 21%-35%) were found to have a variant of uncertain significance. Thirty-four patients also had next-generation sequencing (NGS) of their somatic tissue. Among this subset, 8 of 34 (23%) had an alteration in homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes. Of the 14 patients with a germline mutation, none had a prior personal history of malignancy and 6 (43%) did not have any first- or second-degree relatives with history of prostate, pancreatic, breast, or ovarian cancer.

CONCLUSION

We report on the real-world characteristics of prostate cancer patients who underwent mainstream germline genetic testing. Personal history and family history of cancer cannot reliably stratify patients for the presence of pathogenic germline variants.

Predicting Prostate Cancer Molecular Subtype With Deep Learning on Histopathologic Images

Microscopic examination of prostate cancer has failed to reveal a reproducible association between molecular and morphologic features. However, deep-learning algorithms trained on hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained whole slide images (WSI) may outperform the human eye and help to screen for clinically-relevant genomic alterations. We created deep-learning algorithms to identify prostate tumors with underlying ETS-related gene (ERG) fusions or PTEN deletions using the following 4 stages: (1) automated tumor identification, (2) feature representation learning, (3) classification, and (4) explainability map generation. A novel transformer-based hierarchical architecture was trained on a single representative WSI of the dominant tumor nodule from a radical prostatectomy (RP) cohort with known ERG/PTEN status (n = 224 and n = 205, respectively). Two distinct vision transformer-based networks were used for feature extraction, and a distinct transformer-based model was used for classification. The ERG algorithm performance was validated across 3 RP cohorts, including 64 WSI from the pretraining cohort (AUC, 0.91) and 248 and 375 WSI from 2 independent RP cohorts (AUC, 0.86 and 0.89, respectively). In addition, we tested the ERG algorithm performance in 2 needle biopsy cohorts comprised of 179 and 148 WSI (AUC, 0.78 and 0.80, respectively). Focusing on cases with homogeneous (clonal) PTEN status, PTEN algorithm performance was assessed using 50 WSI reserved from the pretraining cohort (AUC, 0.81), 201 and 337 WSI from 2 independent RP cohorts (AUC, 0.72 and 0.80, respectively), and 151 WSI from a needle biopsy cohort (AUC, 0.75). For explainability, the PTEN algorithm was also applied to 19 WSI with heterogeneous (subclonal) PTEN loss, where the percentage tumor area with predicted PTEN loss correlated with that based on immunohistochemistry (r = 0.58, P = .0097). These deep-learning algorithms to predict ERG/PTEN status prove that H&E images can be used to screen for underlying genomic alterations in prostate cancer.

Guidelines for genetic testing in prostate cancer: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Genetic testing, to identify pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in prostate cancer, is valuable in guiding treatment decisions for men with prostate cancer and to inform cancer prevention and early detection options for their immediate blood relatives. There are various guidelines and consensus statements for genetic testing in prostate cancer. Our aim is to review genetic testing recommendations across current guidelines and consensus statements and the level of evidence supporting those recommendations.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Electronic database searches and manual searches of grey literature, including websites of key organisations were conducted. Using the Population, Concept, Context (PCC) framework, this scoping review included: men with prostate cancer or men at high risk of prostate cancer and their biological families; existing guidelines and consensus statements with supporting evidence for genetic testing of men with prostate cancer from any geographical location worldwide.

RESULTS

Of the 660 citations identified, 23 guidelines and consensus statements met the inclusion criteria for the scoping review. Based on different levels of evidence about who should be tested and how, a diverse range of recommendations were identified. There was general consensus among the guidelines and consensus statements that men with metastatic disease be offered genetic testing; however, there was less consensus in relation to genetic testing in localised prostate cancer. While there was some consensus in relation to which genes to test, recommendations varied regarding who to test, testing methods and implementation.

CONCLUSION

While genetic testing in prostate cancer is routinely recommended and numerous guidelines exist, there is still considerable lack of consensus regarding who should be tested and how they should be tested. Further evidence is needed to inform value-based genetic testing strategies for implementation in practice.

Genetic and Genomic Testing for Prostate Cancer: Beyond DNA Repair

Significant progress has been made in genetic and genomic testing for prostate cancer across the disease spectrum. Molecular profiling is increasingly relevant for routine clinical management, fueled in part by advancements in testing technology and integration of biomarkers into clinical trials. In metastatic prostate cancer, defects in DNA damage response genes are now established predictors of benefit to US Food and Drug Administration-approved poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors, and trials are actively investigating these and other targeted treatment strategies in earlier disease states. Excitingly, opportunities for molecularly informed management beyond DNA damage response genes are also maturing. Germline genetic variants (eg, BRCA2 or MSH2/6) and polygenic germline risk scores are being investigated to inform cancer screening and active surveillance in at-risk carriers. RNA expression tests have recently gained traction in localized prostate cancer, enabling patient risk stratification and tailored treatment intensification via radiotherapy and/or androgen deprivation therapy for localized or salvage treatment. Finally, emerging minimally invasive circulating tumor DNA technology promises to enhance biomarker testing in advanced disease pending additional methodological and clinical validation. Collectively, genetic and genomic tests are rapidly becoming indispensable tools for informing the optimal clinical management of prostate cancer.

An approach to genetic testing in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in Singapore

Introduction

There has been a rapid evolution in the treatment strategies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) following the identification of targetable mutations, making genetic testing essential for patient selection. Although several international guidelines recommend genetic testing for patients with mCRPC, there is a lack of locally endorsed clinical practice guidelines in Singapore.

Method

A multidisciplinary specialist panel with representation from medical and radiation oncology, urology, pathology, interventional radiology, and medical genetics discussed the challenges associated with patient selection, genetic counselling and sample processing in mCRPC.

Results

A clinical model for incorporating genetic testing into routine clinical practice in Singapore was formulated. Tumour testing with an assay that is able to detect both somatic and germline mutations should be utilised. The panel also recommended the "mainstreaming" approach for genetic counselling in which pre-test counselling is conducted by the managing clinician and post-test discussion with a genetic counsellor, to alleviate the bottlenecks at genetic counselling stage in Singapore. The need for training of clinicians to provide pre-test genetic counselling and educating the laboratory personnel for appropriate sample processing that facilitates downstream genetic testing was recognised. Molecular tumour boards and multidisciplinary discussions are recommended to guide therapeutic decisions in mCRPC. The panel also highlighted the issue of reimbursement for genetic testing to reduce patient-borne costs and increase the reach of genetic testing among this patient population.

Conclusion

This article aims to provide strategic and implementable recommendations to overcome the challenges in genetic testing for patients with mCRPC in Singapore.

Genetic Testing and Its Clinical Application in Prostate Cancer Management: Consensus Statements from the Hong Kong Urological Association and Hong Kong Society of Uro-Oncology

Background

In recent years, indications for genetic testing in prostate cancer (PC) have expanded from patients with a family history of prostate and/or related cancers to those with advanced castration-resistant disease, and even to early PC patients for determination of the appropriateness of active surveillance. The current consensus aims to provide guidance to urologists, oncologists and pathologists working with Asian PC patients on who and what to test for in selected populations.

Methods

A joint consensus panel from the Hong Kong Urological Association and Hong Kong Society of Uro-Oncology was convened over a series of 5 physical and virtual meetings. A background literature search on genetic testing in PC was performed in PubMed, ClinicalKey, EBSCOHost, Ovid and ProQuest, and three working subgroups were formed to review and present the relevant evidence. Meeting agendas adopted a modified Delphi approach to ensure that discussions proceed in a structured, iterative and balanced manner, which was followed by an anonymous voting on candidate statements. Of 5 available answer options, a consensus statement was accepted if ≥ 75% of the panelists chose “Accept Completely” (Option A) or “Accept with Some Reservation” (Option B).

Results

The consensus was structured into three parts: indications for testing, testing methods, and therapeutic implications. A list of 35 candidate statements were developed, of which 31 were accepted. The statements addressed questions on the application of PC genetic testing data and guidelines to Asian patients, including patient selection for germline testing, selection of gene panel and tissue sample, provision of genetic counseling, and use of novel systemic treatments in metastatic castration-resistant PC patients.

Conclusion

This consensus provides guidance to urologists, oncologists and pathologists working with Asian patients on indications for genetic testing, testing methods and technical considerations, and associated therapeutic implications.

Emerging Biomarker-Guided Therapies in Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer remains one of the leading causes of cancer death in men worldwide. In the past decade, several new treatments for advanced prostate cancer have been approved. With a wide variety of available drugs, including cytotoxic agents, androgen receptor axis-targeted therapies, and alpha-emitting radiation therapy, identifying their optimal sequencing remains a challenge. Progress in the understanding of the biology of prostate cancer has provided an opportunity for a more refined and personalized treatment selection process. With the advancement of molecular sequencing techniques, genomic precision through the identification of potential treatment targets and predictive biomarkers has been rapidly evolving. In this review, we discussed biomarker-driven treatments for advanced prostate cancer. First, we presented predictive biomarkers for established, global standard treatments for advanced diseases, such as chemotherapy and androgen receptor axis-targeted agents. We also discussed targeted agents with recent approval for special populations, such as poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer with homologous recombination repair-deficient tumors, pembrolizumab in patients with high levels of microsatellite instability or high tumor mutational burden, and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) directed radioligand theragnostic treatment for PSMA expressing tumors. Additionally, we discussed evolving treatments, such as cancer vaccines, chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T), Bispecific T-cell engagers (BiTEs), other targeted agents such as AKT inhibitors, and various combination treatments. In summary, advances in molecular genetics have begun to propel personalized medicine forward in the management of advanced prostate cancer, allowing for a more precise, biomarker-driven treatment selection with the goal of improving overall efficacy.

Hereditary cancer risk assessment and genetic testing in the community urology practice setting

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the feasibility of integrating a hereditary cancer risk assessment (HCRA) process in the community urology practice setting for patients with prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

In this prospective intervention, an HCRA process was implemented across six different community urology clinics between May 2019 and April 2020. The intervention included a process integration during which the workflow at each site was refined, a post-integration period during which HCRA was conducted in all patients with PCa, and a follow-up period during which healthcare providers and patients reported their satisfaction with the HCRA and genetic testing process.

RESULTS

Among patients who completed a family history assessment during the post-integration period, 23.6% met guideline criteria for genetic testing. Of all patients seen at the clinic during the post-integration period, 8.7% completed genetic testing; this was a twofold increase over the period immediately preceding process integration (4.2%), and a sevenfold increase over the same period 1 year prior (1.2%). The majority of providers reported that the HCRA was as important as other regularly performed assessments (61.0%) and planned to continue using the process in their practice (68.3%). Most patients believed that the genetic test results were important for their future cancer care (84.7%) and had already shared their test results with at least one family member (63.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that implementing an HCRA process in the community urology practice setting was feasible, generally favored by providers and patients, and resulted in an increase in the number of patients with PCa who completed genetic testing.

Real-world homologous recombination repair mutation testing in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in the USA, Europe and Japan

Aim: To assess homologous recombination repair mutation (HRRm) testing patterns in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Methods: A point-in-time, international survey conducted January–August 2020. Results: Three-quarters of physicians (oncologists, urologists, specialist surgeons) globally reported access to genetic/genomic testing and just over half were HRRm testers. Surveyed physicians reported HRRm testing and positivity rates for 1913 patients, which were 18.1% and 33.7%, respectively. Of patients tested (n = 347), the most common HRR genes tested were BRCA (91.6%) and ATM (47.3%). Conclusion: Overall testing rates were low, with physicians mostly testing patients they considered higher risk. Increased awareness and education are needed to encourage broader testing, to understand familial risk and to identify patients with worse outcomes or those eligible for life-prolonging treatments.

Genetic testing for homologous recombination repair (HRR) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): challenges and solutions

Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have an average survival of only 13 months. Identification of novel predictive and actionable biomarkers in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway in up to a quarter of patients with mCRPC has led to the approval of targeted therapies like poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi), with the potential to improve survival outcomes. The approval of PARPi has led to guideline bodies such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) to actively recommend germline and or somatic HRR gene panel testing to identify patients who will benefit from PARPi. However, there are several challenges as genetic testing is still at an early stage especially in low- and middle-income countries, with cost and availability being major impediments. In addition, there are issues such as choice of optimal tissue for genetic testing, archival, storage, retrieval of tissue blocks, interpretation and classification of variants in the HRR pathway, and the need for pretest and post-test genetic counseling. This review provides insights into the HRR gene mutations prevalent in mCRPC and the challenges for a more widespread gene testing to identify actionable germline pathogenic variants and somatic mutations in the HRR pathway, and proposes a clinical algorithm to enhance the efficiency of the gene testing process.

Basic Science and Molecular Genetics of Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness

Androgen receptor function, tumor cell plasticity, loss of tumor suppressors, and defects in DNA repair genes affect aggressive features of prostate cancer. Prostate cancer development, progression, and aggressive behavior are often attributable to function of the androgen receptor. Tumor cell plasticity, neuroendocrine features, and loss of tumor suppressors lend aggressive behavior to prostate cancer cells. DNA repair defects have ramifications for prostate cancer cell behavior.

Recent Insights on Genetic Testing in Primary Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common cancers in developed countries. The results of large trials indicate that the proportion of PCa attributable to hereditary factors is as high as 15%, highlighting the importance of genetic testing. Despite improved understanding of the prevalence of pathogenic variants among men with PCa, it remains unclear which men will most benefit from genetic testing. In this review, we summarize recent evidence on genetic testing in primary PCa and its impact on routine clinical practice. We outline current guideline recommendations on genetic testing, most importantly, for mutations in BRCA1/2, MMR, CHEK2, PALB2, and HOXB13 genes, as well as various single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with an increased risk of developing PCa. The implementation of genetic testing in clinical practice, especially in young patients with aggressive tumors or those with positive family history, represents a new challenge for the coming years and will identify men with pathogenic variants who may benefit from early screening/intervention and specific therapeutic options.

Circulating Tumor DNA Testing for Homology Recombination Repair Genes in Prostate Cancer: From the Lab to the Clinic

Approximately 23% of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers (mCRPC) harbor deleterious aberrations in DNA repair genes. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) therapy has shown improvements in overall survival in patients with mCRPC who harbor somatic and/or germline alterations of homology recombination repair (HRR) genes. Peripheral blood samples are typically used for the germline mutation analysis test using the DNA extracted from peripheral blood leucocytes. Somatic alterations can be assessed by extracting DNA from a tumor tissue sample or using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) extracted from a plasma sample. Each of these genetic tests has its own benefits and limitations. The main advantages compared to the tissue test are that liquid biopsy is a non-invasive and easily repeatable test with the value of better representing tumor heterogeneity than primary biopsy and of capturing changes and/or resistance mutations in the genetic tumor profile during disease progression. Furthermore, ctDNA can inform about mutation status and guide treatment options in patients with mCRPC. Clinical validation and test implementation into routine clinical practice are currently very limited. In this review, we discuss the state of the art of the ctDNA test in prostate cancer compared to blood and tissue testing. We also illustrate the ctDNA testing workflow, the available techniques for ctDNA extraction, sequencing, and analysis, describing advantages and limits of each techniques.

Germline Genetics of Prostate Cancer: Prevalence of Risk Variants and Clinical Implications for Disease Management

Prostate cancer has entered into the era of precision medicine with the recent approvals of targeted therapeutics (olaparib and rucaparib). The presence of germline mutations has important hereditary cancer implications for patients with prostate cancer, and germline testing is increasingly important in cancer screening, risk assessment, and the overall treatment and management of the disease. In this review, we discuss germline variants associated with inherited predisposition, prostate cancer risk and outcomes. We review recommendations for germline testing, available testing platforms, genetic counseling as well as discuss the therapeutic implications of germline variants relevant to prostate cancer treatments. Understanding the role of germline (heritable) mutations that affect prostate cancer biology and risk as well as the subsequent effect of these alterations on potential therapies is critical as the treatment paradigm shifts towards precision medicine. Furthermore, enhancing patient education tactics and healthcare system infrastructure is essential for the utilization of relevant predictive biomarkers and the improvement of clinical outcomes of patients with prostate cancer or at high risk of developing the disease.

DNA damage repair gene mutation testing and genetic counseling in men with/without prostate cancer: a systematic review

Background: Ongoing clinical trials are investigating PARP inhibitors to target the DNA damage repair (DDR) pathway in prostate cancer. DDR mutation screening will guide treatment strategy and assess eligibility for clinical trials. Materials & methods: This systematic review estimated the rate of DDR mutation testing or genetic counseling among men with or at risk of prostate cancer. Results: From 6856 records, one study fulfilled the inclusion criteria and described men undiagnosed with prostate cancer with a family history of BRCA1/2 mutation who received DDR mutation testing. Conclusion: With only one study included in this first systematic review of DDR mutation testing or genetic counseling in men with or at risk of prostate cancer, more research is warranted.

Practical Considerations and Challenges for Germline Genetic Testing in Patients With Prostate Cancer: Recommendations From the Germline Genetics Working Group of the PCCTC

Germline genetic testing is now routinely recommended for patients with prostate cancer (PCa) because of expanded guidelines and options for targeted treatments. However, integrating genetic testing into oncology and urology clinical workflows remains a challenge because of the increased number of patients with PCa requiring testing and the limited access to genetics providers. This suggests a critical unmet need for genetic services outside of historical models. This review addresses current guidelines, considerations, and challenges for PCa genetic testing and offers a practical guide for genetic counseling and testing delivery, with solutions to help address potential barriers and challenges for both providers and patients. As genetic and genomic testing become integral to PCa care, developing standardized systems for implementation in the clinic is essential for delivering precision oncology to patients with PCa and realizing the full scope and impact of genetic testing.

Genetic testing for the clinician in prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common cancers worldwide and a leading cause of cancer-related mortality. Although the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer has improved substantially in recent years, new molecular biomarkers are needed to further prolong survival and improve the quality of life in these patients.

AREAS COVERED

This review analyzes the current evidence for prognostic and predictive molecular biomarkers that can be applied across different clinical scenarios, ranging from localized disease to metastatic castration-resistant PCa, with a particular emphasis on the biomarkers likely to become available in routine clinical practice in the near future.

EXPERT OPINION

There is a growing need for molecular testing to identify the most indolent types of prostate cancer to help optimize treatment strategies and spare treatment in these patients when possible. Current trends in the treatment of prostate cancer underscore the unmet clinical need for biomarkers to improve decision-making in a challenging clinical setting.

Evaluation of a Mainstream Model of Genetic Testing for Men With Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

To identify the approximately 12% with inherited cancer predisposition, all men with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) should be offered germline genetic testing. This guides treatment choices and impacts cancer prevention in the family. Limited genetic services globally present a barrier to testing. This study tested a potential solution, "mainstreaming," where counseling and testing are performed by the patient's oncologist.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Men with mPC at three Australian sites were offered germline genetic testing at their medical oncology appointment. Panel testing (ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CHEK2, EPCAM, FANCA, HOXB13, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, NBN, PALB2, PMS2, RAD51D, and TP53) was performed on saliva/blood (Invitae, San Francisco, CA). Primary outcomes were clinician and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included mutation rates and resource allocation.

RESULTS

Of 66 men offered testing, 63 (95%) accepted. Four pathogenic variants were identified (two BRCA2, one NBN, and one MSH6). Fifty patients and nine clinicians completed questionnaires. Satisfaction was high. All patients were pleased to have had testing overall, 98% (46 of 47) to have had testing at their usual oncology appointment, and all to receive results from their usual specialist, rather than a separate genetics appointment. A total of 88% (7 of 8) of clinicians felt confident, and all were satisfied with mainstreaming. Mainstreaming was resource efficient, requiring 87% fewer genetic consultations than traditional genetic counseling.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that mainstreaming of men with mPC is feasible, resource efficient, and satisfactory for clinicians and patients. Widespread implementation as standard of care would facilitate timely access to genetic testing for men with mPC.

Rare Tumor-Normal Matched Whole Exome Sequencing Identifies Novel Genomic Pathogenic Germline and Somatic Aberrations

Whole exome sequencing (WES) of matched tumor-normal pairs in rare tumors has the potential to identify genome-wide mutations and copy number alterations (CNAs). We evaluated 27 rare cancer patients with tumor-normal matching by WES and tumor-only next generation sequencing (NGS) as a comparator. Our goal was to: 1) identify known and novel variants and CNAs in rare cancers with comparison to common cancers; 2) examine differences between germline and somatic variants and how that functionally impacts rare tumors; 3) detect and characterize alleles in biologically relevant genes-pathways that may be of clinical importance but not represented in classical cancer genes. We identified 3343 germline single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and small indel variants-1670 in oncogenes and 1673 in tumor suppressor genes-generating an average of 124 germline variants/case. The number of somatic SNVs and small indels detected in all cases was 523:306 in oncogenes and 217 in tumor suppressor genes. Of the germline variants, six were identified to be pathogenic or likely pathogenic. In the 27 analyzed rare cancer cases, CNAs are variable depending on tumor type, germline pathogenic variants are more common. Cell fate pathway mutations (e.g., Hippo, Notch, Wnt) dominate pathogenesis and double hit (mutation + CNV) represent ~18% cases.

High prevalence of DNA damage repair gene defects and TP53 alterations in men with treatment-naïve metastatic prostate cancer -Results from a prospective pilot study using a 37 gene panel

BACKGROUND

Defects in DNA damage repair genes characterize a subset of men with prostate cancer and provide an attractive opportunity for precision oncology approaches. The prevalence of such perturbations in newly diagnosed, treatment-naïve patients with a high risk for lethal disease outcome, however, has not been sufficiently explored.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prostate cancer specimens from 67 men with newly diagnosed early onset, localized high-risk/locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer were included in this prospective pilot study. Tumor samples, including 30 prostate biopsies, were analyzed by targeted next generation sequencing using a formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue-optimized 37 DNA damage repair and checkpoint gene panel.

RESULTS

The drop-out rate due to an insufficient quantity of DNA was 4.5% (3 of 67 patients). In the remaining 64 patients, the rate of pathogenic DNA damage repair gene mutations was 26.6%. The highest rate of pathogenic DNA damage repair and checkpoint gene mutations was found in men with treatment-naïve metastatic prostate cancer (38.9%). In addition, a high number of likely pathogenic mutations and gene deletions were detected. Altogether, one or more pathogenic mutation, likely pathogenic mutation or gene deletion affected 43 of 64 patients (67.2%) including 29 of 36 patients (80.6%) with treatment-naïve metastatic prostate cancer. Men with metastatic prostate cancer showed a high prevalence of alterations in TP53 (36.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility, performance and clinical relevance of somatic targeted next generation sequencing using a unique 37 DNA damage repair and checkpoint gene panel under routine conditions. Our results indicate that this approach can detect actionable DNA repair gene alterations, uncommon mutations as well as mutations associated with therapy resistance in a high number of patients, in particular patients with treatment-naïve metastatic prostate cancer.

Genetic counseling and previvorship in patients with urologic malignancies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With the increasing use of precision medicine in oncology, genetic counseling and germline genetic testing are becoming increasingly important in urologic malignancies. In this review, we summarize the most relevant recent literature regarding genetic counseling in prostate and kidney cancers.

RECENT FINDINGS

Genetic counseling and testing is considered as an important component of workup for many patients with urologic malignancies but is likely underutilized. Genetic counseling in prostate cancer is a timely topic, especially as the demand for genetic counselors in oncology continues to increase with expanding guidelines for consideration of genetic testing. Genetic testing has historically been limited to only those with the most suspicious histories, but emerging data from larger studies indicates that the clinical presentation of inherited cancer syndromes are broader than previously appreciated. New models need to be developed for pretest counseling to meet increased demand.

SUMMARY

Genetic counseling and testing will become increasingly important for patients with urologic malignancies. There is limited literature on this topic, especially related to kidney cancers. Further studies are needed to determine the best way to incorporate genetic counseling and testing into the care of these patients.

BRCA2 and Other DDR Genes in Prostate Cancer

Germline and somatic aberrations in DNA damage repair (DDR) genes are more prevalent in prostate cancer than previously recognized, with BRCA2 as the most commonly altered gene. Germline mutations in BRCA2 have been linked to poor prognosis when patients are managed under the protocols currently approved for prostate cancer. The impact of germline mutations in other DDR genes beyond BRCA2 remain unclear. Importantly, a quarter of prostate cancer patients identified as germline mutation carriers lack a family history of cancer. The clinical implications of somatic DDR defects are yet to be elucidated. Poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and platinum-based chemotherapy have proven to be effective in the treatment of other tumor types linked to BRCA1 and BRCA2 alterations and several trials are currently evaluating their efficacy in prostate cancer. Here, we summarize the available evidence regarding the prevalence of somatic and germline DDR defects in prostate cancer; their association with clinical outcomes; the trials assessing the efficacy of new therapies that exploit DDR defects in prostate cancer and briefly discuss some uncertainties about the most appropriate management for these patients.