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

The Evolution of Genetic Testing from Focused Testing to Panel Testing and from Patient Focused to Population Testing: Are We There Yet?

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.

"There should be one spot that you can go:" BRCA mutation carriers' perspectives on cancer risk management and a hereditary cancer registry

Individuals who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variants are recommended to have extensive cancer prevention screening and risk-reducing surgeries. Uptake of these recommendations is variable, and there remains room for improvement in the risk management of BRCA carriers. This paper explores female BRCA carriers' experiences with the current model of care and their perspectives on (and interest in) an inherited cancer registry. Findings can inform the development of a dedicated high-risk screening and management program for these patients. Quantitative and qualitative data were gathered through a provincial descriptive survey and semi-structured qualitative interviews to assess BRCA carriers' opinions toward risk management services in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), Canada. Survey (n = 69) and interview data (n = 15) revealed continuity and coordination challenges with the current system of care of high-risk individuals. Respondents suggested an inherited cancer registry would help identify high-risk individuals and provide a centralized system of risk management for identified carriers. Respondents identified concerns about the privacy of their registry data, including who could access it. Findings suggest BRCA carriers see great value in an inherited cancer registry. Specifically, participants noted it could provide a centralized system to help improve the coordination of burdensome, life-long risk management. Important patient concerns about protecting their privacy and their health data confidentiality must be addressed in patient and public information and informed consent documents about a registry.

Parents' attitudes towards research involving genome sequencing of their healthy children: a qualitative study

With widespread genomic sequencing research efforts, there is increasing impetus to return results to participants. Parents of healthy children are increasingly asked to participate in genomic research, yet there are limited studies of parental expectations for the return of results amongst healthy children. We explored parental attitudes towards their healthy children's participation in genomic research and expectations for return of results. Data collection involved semi-structured telephone interviews with parents of healthy children participating in a primary care research network. Transcripts were analyzed thematically using constant comparison. A total of 26 parents were interviewed: 22 were female, 19 self-reported as White/European, and 20 were aged 30-39. Three themes emerged: (1) Reciprocity; Parents preferred to receive medically actionable, childhood-onset results and expected recontact overtime in exchange for their research participation. (2) Downstream impacts of testing; Parents expected future clinical benefits but were concerned about the risk of genetic discrimination. (3) Power and empowerment; Some parents felt empowered to take preventative action for their child and relatives, while others did not want to limit their child's autonomy. Considering these tensions may help to inform participant-centered approaches to optimize parental decision-making and participation, as well as maximize the utility of results.

Cost Effectiveness of Genomic Population Health Screening in Adults: A Review of Modeling Studies and Future Directions

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.

Recent Trends in Biosensing and Diagnostic Methods for Novel Cancer Biomarkers

Cancer is one of the major public health issues in the world. It has become the second leading cause of death, with approximately 75% of cancer deaths transpiring in low- or middle-income countries. It causes a heavy global economic cost estimated at more than a trillion dollars per year. The most common cancers are breast, colon, rectum, prostate, and lung cancers. Many of these cancers can be treated effectively and cured if detected at the primary stage. Nowadays, around 50% of cancers are detected at late stages, leading to serious health complications and death. Early diagnosis of cancer diseases substantially increases the efficient treatment and high chances of survival. Biosensors are one of the potential screening methodologies useful in the early screening of cancer biomarkers. This review summarizes the recent findings about novel cancer biomarkers and their advantages over traditional biomarkers, and novel biosensing and diagnostic methods for them; thus, this review may be helpful in the early recognition and monitoring of treatment response of various human cancers.