Challenges and approaches to calibrating patient phenotype as evidence for cancer gene variant classification under ACMG/AMP guidelines

Since first publication of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association for Medical Pathology (ACMG/AMP) variant classification guidelines, additional recommendations for application of certain criteria have been released (https://clinicalgenome.org/docs/), to improve their application in the diagnostic setting. However, none have addressed use of the PS4 and PP4 criteria, capturing patient presentation as evidence towards pathogenicity. Application of PS4 can be done through traditional case-control studies, or "proband counting" within or across clinical testing cohorts. Review of the existing PS4 and PP4 specifications for Hereditary Cancer Gene Variant Curation Expert Panels revealed substantial differences in the approach to defining specifications. Using BRCA1, BRCA2 and TP53 as exemplar genes, we calibrated different methods proposed for applying the "PS4 proband counting" criterion. For each approach, we considered limitations, non-independence with other ACMG/AMP criteria, broader applicability, and variability in results for different datasets. Our findings highlight inherent overlap of proband-counting methods with ACMG/AMP frequency codes, and the importance of calibration to derive dataset-specific code weights that can account for potential between-dataset differences in ascertainment and other factors. Our work emphasizes the advantages and generalizability of logistic regression analysis over simple proband-counting approaches to empirically determine the relative predictive capacity and weight of various personal clinical features in the context of multigene panel testing, for improved variant interpretation. We also provide a general protocol, including instructions for data formatting and a web-server for analysis of personal history parameters, to facilitate dataset-specific calibration analyses required to use such data for germline variant classification.

Pretest Video Education Versus Genetic Counseling for Patients With Prostate Cancer: ProGen, A Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

Germline genetic testing (GT) is recommended for men with prostate cancer (PC), but testing through traditional models is limited. The ProGen study examined a novel model aimed at providing access to GT while promoting education and informed consent.

METHODS

Men with potentially lethal PC (metastatic, localized with a Gleason score of ≥8, persistent prostate-specific antigen after local therapy), diagnosis age ≤55 years, previous malignancy, and family history suggestive of a pathogenic variant (PV) and/or at oncologist's discretion were randomly assigned 3:1 to video education (VE) or in-person genetic counseling (GC). Participants had 67 genes analyzed (Ambry), with results disclosed via telephone by a genetic counselor. Outcomes included GT consent, GT completion, PV prevalence, and survey measures of satisfaction, psychological impact, genetics knowledge, and family communication. Two-sided Fisher's exact tests were used for between-arm comparisons.

RESULTS

Over a 2-year period, 662 participants at three sites were randomly assigned and pretest VE (n = 498) or GC (n = 164) was completed by 604 participants (VE, 93.1%; GC, 88.8%), of whom 596 participants (VE, 98.9%; GC, 97.9%) consented to GT and 591 participants completed GT (VE, 99.3%; GC, 98.6%). These differences were not statistically significant although subtle differences in satisfaction and psychological impact were. Notably, 84 PVs were identified in 78 participants (13.2%), with BRCA1/2 PV comprising 32% of participants with a positive result (BRCA2 n = 21, BRCA1 n = 4).

CONCLUSION

Both VE and traditional GC yielded high GT uptake without significant differences in outcome measures of completion, GT uptake, genetics knowledge, and family communication. The increased demand for GT with limited genetics resources supports consideration of pretest VE for patients with PC.

A genotype-first approach identifies high incidence of NF1 pathogenic variants with distinct disease associations

Loss of function variants in the NF1 gene cause neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), a genetic disorder characterized by complete penetrance, prevalence of 1 in 3,000, characteristic physical exam findings, and a substantially increased risk for malignancy. However, our understanding of the disorder is entirely based on patients ascertained through phenotype-first approaches. Leveraging a genotype-first approach in two large patient cohorts, we demonstrate unexpectedly high prevalence (1 in 450-750) of NF1 pathogenic variants. Half were identified in individuals lacking clinical features of NF1, with many appearing to have post-zygotic mosaicism for the identified variant. Incidentally discovered variants were not associated with classic NF1 features but were associated with an increased incidence of malignancy compared to a control population. Our findings suggest that NF1 pathogenic variants are substantially more common than previously thought, often characterized by somatic mosaicism and reduced penetrance, and are important contributors to cancer risk in the general population.

Abstract A003: Risks of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast associated with pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes

Introduction: The relationship between germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in cancer predisposition genes and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is not well established. The objective of this study is to determine the risks of DCIS and contralateral breast cancer among women with DCIS associated with germline PVs in cancer predisposition genes. Methods: Associations between pathogenic variants in 11 cancer predisposition genes (ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CHEK2, MSH6, PALB2, RAD51C, and RAD51D) and DCIS were determined in case control analyses of a population-based cohort of 3876 women with DCIS and age-matched unaffected women, and in a clinical cohort of 9887 DCIS cases undergoing clinical genetic testing at Ambry Genetics and unaffected reference controls. The incidence of contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 PV carriers with DCIS was also evaluated in a time-to-event analysis. Results: The mean age at diagnosis of DCIS was 50 years in the clinical testing cohort and 59 years in the population-based cohort. The frequency of PVs in 11 predisposition genes among DCIS cases was 6.9% in the clinical testing cohort and 4.9% in the population-based cohort. PVs in ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, MSH6, PALB2, and RAD51D were associated with significantly increased risks (Odds Ratio (OR) >2) of DCIS in the clinical testing cohort whereas only PVs in BRCA1, CHEK2, PALB2, and ATM were associated with significantly increased risks of DCIS in the population-based cohort. The cumulative incidence of contralateral breast cancer among BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 PV carriers with DCIS was 11% in 5-years and 20% in 15-years. Conclusions: This study provides new insights into PVs that predispose to DCIS. In addition, it establishes an increased risk of contralateral breast cancer risk among women with DCIS who are carriers of PVs in BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2. These findings will guide surveillance and risk reducing strategies in germline PV carriers with DCIS.

Citation Format: Huaizhi Huang, Ronan E. Couch, Holly LaDuca, Siddhartha Yadav, Eric C. Polley, Nicholas J. Boddicker, Jie Na, Rohan D. Gnanaolivu, David E. Goldgar, Tina Pesaran, Steven N. Hart, Jill S. Dolinsky, Julie R. Palmer, Lauren Teras, Alpa V. Patel, Kathryn J. Ruddy, Janet E. Olson, Celine M. Vachon, Peter Kraft, Song Yao, Amy Trentham-Dietz, Katherine L. Nathanson, Jeffrey N. Weitzel, Susan M. Domchek, Fergus J. Couch, Chunling Hu. Risks of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast associated with pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Rethinking DCIS: An Opportunity for Prevention?; 2022 Sep 8-11; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Can Prev Res 2022;15(12 Suppl_1): Abstract nr A003.

Germline Pathogenic Variants in Cancer Predisposition Genes Among Women With Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast

PURPOSE

To determine the contribution of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in hereditary cancer testing panel genes to invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included 2,999 women with ILC from a population-based cohort and 3,796 women with ILC undergoing clinical multigene panel testing (clinical cohort). Frequencies of germline PVs in breast cancer predisposition genes (ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CHEK2, PALB2, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53) were compared between women with ILC and unaffected female controls and between women with ILC and infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC).

RESULTS

The frequency of PVs in breast cancer predisposition genes among women with ILC was 6.5% in the clinical cohort and 5.2% in the population-based cohort. In case-control analysis, CDH1 and BRCA2 PVs were associated with high risks of ILC (odds ratio [OR] > 4) and CHEK2, ATM, and PALB2 PVs were associated with moderate (OR = 2-4) risks. BRCA1 PVs and CHEK2 p.Ile157Thr were not associated with clinically relevant risks (OR < 2) of ILC. Compared with IDC, CDH1 PVs were > 10-fold enriched, whereas PVs in BRCA1 were substantially reduced in ILC.

CONCLUSION

The study establishes that PVs in ATM, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2, and PALB2 are associated with an increased risk of ILC, whereas BRCA1 PVs are not. The similar overall PV frequencies for ILC and IDC suggest that cancer histology should not influence the decision to proceed with genetic testing. Similar to IDC, multigene panel testing may be appropriate for women with ILC, but CDH1 should be specifically discussed because of low prevalence and gastric cancer risk.

Risk of Late-Onset Breast Cancer in Genetically Predisposed Women

PURPOSE

The prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in established breast cancer predisposition genes in women in the general population over age 65 years is not well-defined. However, testing guidelines suggest that women diagnosed with breast cancer over age 65 years might have < 2.5% likelihood of a PV in a high-penetrance gene. This study aimed to establish the frequency of PVs and remaining risks of breast cancer for each gene in women over age 65 years.

METHODS

A total of 26,707 women over age 65 years from population-based studies (51.5% with breast cancer and 48.5% unaffected) were tested for PVs in germline predisposition gene. Frequencies of PVs and associations between PVs in each gene and breast cancer were assessed, and remaining lifetime breast cancer risks were estimated for non-Hispanic White women with PVs.

RESULTS

The frequency of PVs in predisposition genes was 3.18% for women with breast cancer and 1.48% for unaffected women over age 65 years. PVs in BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 were found in 3.42% of women diagnosed with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, 1.0% with ER-positive, and 3.01% with triple-negative breast cancer. Frequencies of PVs were lower among women with no first-degree relatives with breast cancer. PVs in CHEK2, PALB2, BRCA2, and BRCA1 were associated with increased risks (odds ratio = 2.9-4.0) of breast cancer. Remaining lifetime risks of breast cancer were ≥ 15% for those with PVs in BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that all women diagnosed with triple-negative breast cancer or ER-negative breast cancer should receive genetic testing and that women over age 65 years with BRCA1 and BRCA2 PVs and perhaps with PALB2 and CHEK2 PVs should be considered for magnetic resonance imaging screening.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Multigene Hereditary Cancer Panel Test Results for Women With Breast Cancer

To evaluate the racial and ethnic differences in prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) and the effect of race and ethnicity on breast cancer (BC) risk among carriers, results of multigene testing of 77 900 women with BC (non-Hispanic White [NHW] = 57 003; Ashkenazi-Jewish = 4798; Black = 6722; Hispanic = 5194; and Asian = 4183) were analyzed, and the frequency of PVs in each gene were compared between BC patients (cases) and race- and ethnicity-matched gnomAD reference controls. Compared with NHWs, BRCA1 PVs were enriched in Ashkenazi-Jews and Hispanics, whereas CHEK2 PVs were statistically significantly lower in Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians (all 2-sided P < .05). In case-control studies, BARD1 PVs were associated with high risks (odds ratio > 4.00) of BC in Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians; ATM PVs were associated with increased risk of BC among all races and ethnicities except Asians, whereas CHEK2 and BRIP1 PVs were associated with increased risk of BC among NHWs and Hispanics only. These findings suggest a need for personalized management of BC risk in PV carriers based on race and ethnicity.

Germline pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes among women with invasive lobular cancer of breast

10581

Background: The prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in cancer predisposition genes among women with invasive lobular breast cancer (ILC) and the risk of ILC in PV carriers is not well-defined. Methods: The study included 2,999 women with ILC and 32,544 unaffected controls from a population-based cohort; 3,796 women with ILC and 20,323 women with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) undergoing clinical multigene panel testing (clinical cohort); and 125,748 exome sequences from unrelated women without a cancer diagnosis in the gnomAD 3.0 dataset. Frequencies of germline PVs in breast cancer predisposition genes ( ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CHEK2, PALB2, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53) were compared between women with ILC and unaffected controls in both cohorts and between women with ILC and IDC in the clinical cohort. Results: The frequency of PVs in breast cancer predisposition genes among women with ILC was 6.5% in the clinical cohort and 5.2% in the population-based cohort. In case-control analyses, CDH1 and BRCA2 PVs were associated with high risks of ILC (Odds ratio (OR) > 4), and CHEK2, ATM and PALB2 PVs were associated with moderate (OR = 2-4) risks. BRCA1 PVs and CHEK2 p.Ile157Thr were not associated with clinically relevant risks (OR < 2) of ILC. PV frequencies in these genes in ILC and IDC were similar except for PV frequencies in BRCA1 and CDH1. Conclusions: The study establishes that PVs in ATM, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2 and PALB2 are associated with an increased risk of ILC, whereas BRCA1 PVs are not. The similar overall PV frequencies for ILC and IDC suggest that cancer histology should not influence the decision to proceed with genetic testing. While, multigene panel testing may be appropriate for women with ILC, CDH1 should be specifically discussed in the context of low prevalence and attendant gastric cancer risk.

Abstract PD10-07: Rna genetic testing improves detection of patients with hereditary breast cancer

Background: DNA genetic testing is commonly used to inform treatment decisions for breast cancer patients. In recent years, RNA genetic testing has shown promise for increasing the detection of disease-causing variants and decreasing inconclusive results. Here we describe the impact of concurrent DNA and RNA genetic testing on identifying breast cancer patients with germline cancer predisposition who may have been missed by DNA-only testing. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of breast cancer patients who received concurrent DNA and RNA hereditary cancer panel testing between March 2019 and February 2020 at Ambry Genetics. Patients underwent DNA and RNA genetic testing of up to 18 hereditary cancer genes at the discretion of the ordering healthcare provider (APC, ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CHEK2, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, MUTYH, NF1, PALB2, PMS2 exons 1-10, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53). Breast cancer patients with positive results, defined as the presence of a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant in any of these 18 genes, were selected for inclusion in this study (n=946). Results: Concurrent DNA and RNA genetic testing led to the identification of 23 breast cancer patients with positive results who would have otherwise received inconclusive or negative results with DNA-only testing. These cases represented 2.4% of all positive results reported in the 18 genes studied (n=23/946). The majority of RNA-related positive results occurred in either ATM (n=14) or BRCA1/2 (n=7). The remaining two cases involved alterations in NF1 and PMS2. Guidelines for risk-reducing breast surgery (BRCA1/2) and breast imaging surveillance (ATM, BRCA1/2, NF1) were relevant for 30.4% and 95.7% of patients with RNA-dependent positive results, respectively. In addition, treatment options such as PARP inhibitors or clinical trial eligibility were potentially implicated for 91.3% of RNA-dependent positives (BRCA1/2, ATM). In 16 of the 23 cases, variants would have been detected by DNA-only testing but would have remained inconclusive without supporting RNA data. In the remaining 7 cases, abnormal RNA results led to the identification of pathogenic/likely pathogenic intronic variants beyond the analytical range of DNA testing. Thus, these seven patients would have received negative results from DNA-only testing. Four of these cases involved pathogenic/likely pathogenic intronic variants in ATM and three involved pathogenic intronic variants in BRCA1. Conclusions: One in 41 breast cancer patients who test positive on concurrent DNA and RNA genetic testing would have received negative or inconclusive results from DNA-only testing. These findings demonstrate the impact of a comprehensive diagnostic testing approach that includes concurrent DNA and RNA analysis and highlights the important implications for the personalized management of these breast cancer patients including potential missed opportunities for early detection and prevention of additional cancer and familial testing in the absence of RGT.

Citation Format: Holly LaDuca, Lily Hoang, Carolyn Horton, Jessica Profato, Tameron Harvell, Jill S Dolinsky, Tina Pesaran, Rachid Karam. Rna genetic testing improves detection of patients with hereditary breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD10-07.

Ovarian and Breast Cancer Risks Associated With Pathogenic Variants in RAD51C and RAD51D

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to estimate precise age-specific tubo-ovarian carcinoma (TOC) and breast cancer (BC) risks for carriers of pathogenic variants in RAD51C and RAD51D.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 6178 families, 125 with pathogenic variants in RAD51C, and 6690 families, 60 with pathogenic variants in RAD51D. TOC and BC relative and cumulative risks were estimated using complex segregation analysis to model the cancer inheritance patterns in families while adjusting for the mode of ascertainment of each family. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Pathogenic variants in both RAD51C and RAD51D were associated with TOC (RAD51C: relative risk [RR] = 7.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.60 to 10.19; P = 5 × 10-40; RAD51D: RR = 7.60, 95% CI = 5.61 to 10.30; P = 5 × 10-39) and BC (RAD51C: RR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.39 to 2.85; P = 1.55 × 10-4; RAD51D: RR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.24 to 2.72; P = .002). For both RAD51C and RAD51D, there was a suggestion that the TOC relative risks increased with age until around age 60 years and decreased thereafter. The estimated cumulative risks of developing TOC to age 80 years were 11% (95% CI = 6% to 21%) for RAD51C and 13% (95% CI = 7% to 23%) for RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers. The estimated cumulative risks of developing BC to 80 years were 21% (95% CI = 15% to 29%) for RAD51C and 20% (95% CI = 14% to 28%) for RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers. Both TOC and BC risks for RAD51C and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers varied by cancer family history and could be as high as 32-36% for TOC, for carriers with two first-degree relatives diagnosed with TOC, or 44-46% for BC, for carriers with two first-degree relatives diagnosed with BC.

CONCLUSIONS

These estimates will facilitate the genetic counseling of RAD51C and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers and justify the incorporation of RAD51C and RAD51D into cancer risk prediction models.

The Contribution of Germline Predisposition Gene Mutations to Clinical Subtypes of Invasive Breast Cancer From a Clinical Genetic Testing Cohort

BACKGROUND

The germline cancer predisposition genes associated with increased risk of each clinical subtype of breast cancer, defined by estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and HER2, are not well defined.

METHODS

A total of 54 555 invasive breast cancer patients with 56 480 breast tumors were subjected to clinical hereditary cancer multigene panel testing. Heterogeneity for predisposition genes across clinical breast cancer subtypes was assessed by comparing mutation frequencies by gene among tumor subtypes and by association studies between each tumor subtype and reference controls.

RESULTS

Mutations in 15 cancer predisposition genes were detected in 8.6% of patients with ER+/HER2-; 8.9% with ER+/HER2+; 7.7% with ER-/HER2+; and 14.4% of ER-/PR-/HER2- tumors. BRCA1, BRCA2, BARD1, and PALB2 mutations were enriched in ER- and HER2- tumors; RAD51C and RAD51D mutations were enriched in ER- tumors only; TP53 mutations were enriched in HER2+ tumors, and ATM and CHEK2 mutations were enriched in both ER+ and/or HER2+ tumors. All genes were associated with moderate (odds ratio > 2.00) or strong (odds ratio > 5.00) risks of at least one subtype of breast cancer in case-control analyses. Mutations in ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, and TP53 had predicted lifetime absolute risks of at least 20.0% for breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Germline mutations in hereditary cancer panel genes confer subtype-specific risks of breast cancer. Combined tumor subtype, age at breast cancer diagnosis, and family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer information provides refined categorical estimates of mutation prevalence for women considering genetic testing.

Diagnosing hereditary cancer predisposition in men with prostate cancer

PURPOSE

We describe the pathogenic variant spectrum and identify predictors of positive results among men referred for clinical genetic testing for prostate cancer.

METHODS

One thousand eight hundred twelve men with prostate cancer underwent clinical multigene panel testing between April 2012 and September 2017. Stepwise logistic regression determined the most reliable predictors of positive results among clinical variables reported on test requisition forms.

RESULTS

A yield of 9.4-12.1% was observed among men with no prior genetic testing. In this group, the positive rate of BRCA1 and BRCA2 was 4.6%; the positive rate for the mismatch repair genes was 2.8%. Increasing Gleason score (odds ratio [OR] 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-1.45); personal history of breast or pancreatic cancer (OR 3.62; 95% CI 1.37-9.46); family history of breast, ovarian, or pancreatic cancer (OR 2.32 95% CI 1.48-3.65); and family history of Lynch syndrome-associated cancers (OR 1.97; 95% CI 1.23-3.15) were predictors of positive results.

CONCLUSION

These results support multigene panel testing as the primary genetic testing approach for hereditary prostate cancer and are supportive of recommendations for consideration of germline testing in men with prostate cancer. Expanding the criteria for genetic testing should be considered as many pathogenic variants are actionable for treatment of advanced prostate cancer.

A Rare TP53 Mutation Predominant in Ashkenazi Jews Confers Risk of Multiple Cancers

Germline mutations in TP53 cause a rare high penetrance cancer syndrome, Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS). Here, we identified a rare TP53 tetramerization domain missense mutation, c.1000G>C;p.G334R, in a family with multiple late-onset LFS-spectrum cancers. Twenty additional c.1000G>C probands and one c.1000G>A proband were identified, and available tumors showed biallelic somatic inactivation of TP53. The majority of families were of Ashkenazi Jewish descent, and the TP53 c.1000G>C allele was found on a commonly inherited chromosome 17p13.1 haplotype. Transient transfection of the p.G334R allele conferred a mild defect in colony suppression assays. Lymphoblastoid cell lines from the index family in comparison with TP53 normal lines showed that although classical p53 target gene activation was maintained, a subset of p53 target genes (including PCLO, PLTP, PLXNB3, and LCN15) showed defective transactivation when treated with Nutlin-3a. Structural analysis demonstrated thermal instability of the G334R-mutant tetramer, and the G334R-mutant protein showed increased preponderance of mutant conformation. Clinical case review in comparison with classic LFS cohorts demonstrated similar rates of pediatric adrenocortical tumors and other LFS component cancers, but the latter at significantly later ages of onset. Our data show that TP53 c.1000G>C;p.G334R is found predominantly in Ashkenazi Jewish individuals, causes a mild defect in p53 function, and leads to low penetrance LFS. SIGNIFICANCE: TP53 c.1000C>G;p.G334R is a pathogenic, Ashkenazi Jewish-predominant mutation associated with a familial multiple cancer syndrome in which carriers should undergo screening and preventive measures to reduce cancer risk.

Mutation prevalence tables for hereditary cancer derived from multigene panel testing

Multigene panel testing for cancer predisposition mutations is becoming routine in clinical care. However, the gene content of panels offered by testing laboratories vary significantly, and data on mutation detection rates by gene and by the panel is limited, causing confusion among clinicians on which test to order. Using results from 147,994 multigene panel tests conducted at Ambry Genetics, we built an interactive prevalence tool to explore how differences in ethnicity, age of onset, and personal and family history of different cancers affect the prevalence of pathogenic mutations in 31 cancer predisposition genes, across various clinically available hereditary cancer gene panels. Over 13,000 mutation carriers were identified in this high-risk population. Most were non-Hispanic white (74%, n = 109,537), but also Black (n  = 10,875), Ashkenazi Jewish (n  = 10,464), Hispanic (n  = 10,028), and Asian (n  = 7,090). The most prevalent cancer types were breast (50%), ovarian (6.6%), and colorectal (4.7%), which is expected based on genetic testing guidelines and clinician referral for testing. The Hereditary Cancer Multi-Gene Panel Prevalence Tool presented here can be used to provide insight into the prevalence of mutations on a per-gene and per-multigene panel basis, while conditioning on multiple custom phenotypic variables to include race and cancer type.

A randomized controlled trial of video-education or in-person genetic counseling for men with prostate cancer (ProGen)

1507

Background: Approximately 10% of men with advanced prostate cancer (PC) have pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PV) in cancer susceptibility genes and their identification may lead to targeted therapy. Genetic testing (GT) can also guide cancer surveillance and prevention for family members. While GT is recommended for men with potentially lethal PC, traditional testing models are strained, and access limited. The ProGen study examined a novel pretest model aimed at providing access to GT while promoting informed consent. Methods: Inclusion criteria were: potentially lethal PC (metastatic, localized with Gleason score ≥8, rising/persistent PSA after local therapy), diagnosis age ≤ 55 years, prior malignancy, family history suggestive of a PV and/or at oncologist’s discretion. Consented subjects from 3 sites were randomized 3:1 to video education (VE) or in-person genetic counseling (GC). Subjects who consented to GT had 67 genes analyzed (Ambry, USA) with results disclosed by telephone by a genetic counselor. Outcomes included GT uptake, PV prevalence, and survey measures of satisfaction, distress, genetics knowledge, family communication, and impact on cancer care (obtained at the time of intervention, and at 1, 4, and 12 months after result disclosure). Two-sided Fischer exact tests were used for between-arm comparisons. Results: Over a 2-year period: 662 subjects were randomized, VE or GC were completed by 604 subjects (VE: 93.1%, GC: 88.8%) of whom 596 subjects (VE:98.9%, GC:97.9%) consented to GT. To date, 591 subjects have completed GT (VE: 99.3%, GC: 98.6%). At the time of intervention, most subjects agreed or strongly agreed that their assigned arm was useful (VE: 95%, GC: 88%). Differences were not statistically significant. Notably, 84 PV were identified in 78 subjects (13.2%), with BRCA1/2 PV accounting for 32% of subjects with a positive result ( BRCA2:21, BRCA1:4). Conclusions: In this randomized trial, both novel VE and traditional GC yielded high GT uptake without significant differences in outcome measures of acceptability and satisfaction. VE enabled access to critical GT results while maintaining the core tenants of informed consent. PV were found in 13.2% of subjects, 32% of whom had BRCA1/2 PV. Analysis of collected survey data to inform strengths and limitations of VE as compared with pretest GC will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT03328091.

Cancer Risks Associated With Germline PALB2 Pathogenic Variants: An International Study of 524 Families

PURPOSE

To estimate age-specific relative and absolute cancer risks of breast cancer and to estimate risks of ovarian, pancreatic, male breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers associated with germline PALB2 pathogenic variants (PVs) because these risks have not been extensively characterized.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 524 families with PALB2 PVs from 21 countries. Complex segregation analysis was used to estimate relative risks (RRs; relative to country-specific population incidences) and absolute risks of cancers. The models allowed for residual familial aggregation of breast and ovarian cancer and were adjusted for the family-specific ascertainment schemes.

RESULTS

We found associations between PALB2 PVs and risk of female breast cancer (RR, 7.18; 95% CI, 5.82 to 8.85; P = 6.5 × 10-76), ovarian cancer (RR, 2.91; 95% CI, 1.40 to 6.04; P = 4.1 × 10-3), pancreatic cancer (RR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.24 to 4.50; P = 8.7 × 10-3), and male breast cancer (RR, 7.34; 95% CI, 1.28 to 42.18; P = 2.6 × 10-2). There was no evidence for increased risks of prostate or colorectal cancer. The breast cancer RRs declined with age (P for trend = 2.0 × 10-3). After adjusting for family ascertainment, breast cancer risk estimates on the basis of multiple case families were similar to the estimates from families ascertained through population-based studies (P for difference = .41). On the basis of the combined data, the estimated risks to age 80 years were 53% (95% CI, 44% to 63%) for female breast cancer, 5% (95% CI, 2% to 10%) for ovarian cancer, 2%-3% (95% CI females, 1% to 4%; 95% CI males, 2% to 5%) for pancreatic cancer, and 1% (95% CI, 0.2% to 5%) for male breast cancer.

CONCLUSION

These results confirm PALB2 as a major breast cancer susceptibility gene and establish substantial associations between germline PALB2 PVs and ovarian, pancreatic, and male breast cancers. These findings will facilitate incorporation of PALB2 into risk prediction models and optimize the clinical cancer risk management of PALB2 PV carriers.

Abstract P6-08-35: Impact of multigene panel testing on medical management: Preliminary pre- and post-test clinician survey results

Impact of Multigene Panel Testing on Medical Management: Preliminary results of a pre- and post-test clinician survey Identification of individuals with germline variants in cancer predisposition genes has risk management and therapeutic implications. Adoption of multi-gene panel testing (MGPT) has led to the development of management guidelines for numerous high and moderate risk breast/ovarian cancer genes. Limited data exist on the impact of MGPT results as they pertain to these guidelines. Here we describe the results of a survey designed to assess the effect MGPT has on clinical decision making. Clinicians were invited to participate in an IRB-approved study using a web-based survey tool to assess clinical management recommendations before and after MGPT. Pre-test survey invitations were emailed to clinicians upon submission of each order. A post-test survey link was emailed to those who completed a pre-test survey upon results disclosure. For this analysis, we examined responses for cases in which at least one breast cancer susceptibility gene was tested. Genes were grouped into three categories: High Risk breast cancer genes with breast Guidelines (abbreviated HRG: BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, TP53), Moderate Risk breast cancer genes with breast Guidelines (MRG: ATM, CHEK2, NBN, NF1, PALB2), and genes often found on breast cancer gene panels but that have No breast Guidelines (NG: BARD1, BRIP1, FANCC, RAD51C, RAD51D). Concordance to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) v1.2019 guidelines was calculated with regards to recommendations for mammogram, breast MRI, risk reducing mastectomy (RRM), and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO). Pre- and post-test surveys were completed by 160 unique providers for 792 cases. Cases with positive or inconclusive findings in genes outside of the HRG, MRG, or NG groups and those with an elevated polygenic risk score (n=127) were excluded from this study. Of the 665 remaining cases, 90 patients had positive (13.5%), 106 had inconclusive (15.9%), and 469 had negative results (70.5%). At least one management change was recommended in most individuals with positive results in HRG or MRG genes (77.3%), in contrast to those with inconclusive (8.5%) or negative results (8.1%). The proportion of patients with at least one recommended management change did not significantly differ between individuals with positive findings in HRG and MRG genes (82.9% vs. 73.5%, p=0.31). In the HRG group, recommendations were mostly concordant with guidelines for mammogram (85.2%), MRI (74.1%), RRM (82.8%), and BSO (85.7%). Recommendations in the MRG group were also mostly concordant with guidelines for mammogram (93.0%) and MRI (81.4%). No individuals in the NG group received a change in mammogram or MRI recommendations based on test results. Seven of 51 females with positive findings in genes without RRM recommendation were advised to consider RRM (13.7%), and two of 47 females with positive findings in genes without BSO recommendation were advised to consider BSO (4.3%). Recommendations to enroll in a clinical trial were made in 15.5% of all positive cases. The data from this ongoing study demonstrate that positive genetic test results frequently lead to changes in medical management recommendations and in some cases therapeutic options. Our observation that positive results in high risk and moderate risk genes lead to an adjustment in management at similar rates demonstrate the benefit of MGPT. Further, most respondents adhere to NCCN guidelines, even without considering clinical factors and contraindications not captured by this survey that contribute to patient management. While these findings support the clinical utility of MGPT, continued study is essential to guide clinicians and payers on the impact MGPT has on medical management and ultimately health outcomes of high-risk individuals.

Citation Format: Carolyn Horton, Holly LaDuca, Mary H Black, Mary Pritzlaff, Jessica Profato, Kyle Allen, Jill S. Dolinsky. Impact of multigene panel testing on medical management: Preliminary pre- and post-test clinician survey results [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-08-35.

Abstract P6-08-04: Germline mutations in cancer predisposition genes in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast

Background:

Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast accounts for approximately 10-15% of all histologic subtypes of breast cancer. However, apart from germline mutations in CDH1, the contributions of mutations in other cancer predisposition genes to ILC are largely unknown.

Methods: The study population included 3,893 women with ILC of the breast who underwent germline multigene panel testing of cancer predisposition genes at Ambry Genetics from March 2012 to December 2016. The prevalence of predisposition gene mutations in women with ILC was assessed relative to 38,004 women with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) who underwent germline multigene panel testing at Ambry Genetics during the same timeframe. Associations between mutations in each gene and risk of ILC were evaluated using reference controls.

Results: Of the 3,893 women with ILC included in this study, 70.7% were non-Hispanic white, 65.1% had a family history of breast cancer, and 96.4% had estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer. The overall frequency of germline mutations in cancer predisposition genes (ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, CDH1, CDKN2A, CHEK2, MLH1, MRE11A, MSH2, MSH6, NBN, NF1, PALB2, PTEN, RAD51C, RAD51D and TP53) was 7.8% for women with ILC and 10.7% for women with IDC. Mutations in CDH1 were significantly more frequent (Odds Ratio (OR)=12.1, p&lt;0.001), whereas mutations in BRCA1 (OR=0.1; p&lt;0.001) and PALB2 (OR=0.4; p&lt;0.001)were less frequent in women with ILC, compared to women with IDC. When restricting the analysis to ER positive cases only, significant differences in frequencies of ATM (OR=0.6, p=0.03), BRCA1 (OR=0.3, p&lt;0.001), CDH1 (OR=7.7, p&lt;0.001) and PALB2 (OR=0.3, p&lt;0.001) were observed in ILC compared to IDC. By comparison with gnomAD reference controls, ATM, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2, PALB2 and PTEN mutations were significantly associated with an increased risk of lLC and IDC (OR&gt;2), NBN mutations were associated with ILC (OR=3.4; p&lt;0.001) but not IDC, and BRCA1 mutations were not associated with increased risk of ILC. Among 274 women with ILC over the age of 50 without history of any other cancer or a family history of breast or ovarian cancer, 14 (5.1%) were found to carry a mutation in one of the genes evaluated.

Conclusions: In a large cohort of patients with ILC, the frequencies of germline mutations in cancer predisposition genes were similar between ILC and IDC except for ATM, BRCA1, CDH1 and PALB2. Six genes, in addition to CDH1, were found to be germline predisposition genes for ILC. A substantial proportion of patients older than 50 with ILC without a family history of breast or ovarian cancer or a personal history of other cancers were found to be mutation carriers. These findings improve our understanding of germline genetic drivers of ILC and suggest that multigene genetic testing should be considered for all ILC patients.

Citation Format: Siddhartha Yadav, Holly LaDuca, Eric C. Polley, Chunling Hu, Steven N. Hart, Jie Na, Rohan Gnanaolivu, Brandon Smith, David E Goldgar, Tina Pesaran, Jill S. Dolinsky, Fergus J. Couch. Germline mutations in cancer predisposition genes in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-08-04.

A clinical guide to hereditary cancer panel testing: evaluation of gene-specific cancer associations and sensitivity of genetic testing criteria in a cohort of 165,000 high-risk patients

PURPOSE

Despite the rapid uptake of multigene panel testing (MGPT) for hereditary cancer predisposition, there is limited guidance surrounding indications for testing and genes to include.

METHODS

To inform the clinical approach to hereditary cancer MGPT, we comprehensively evaluated 32 cancer predisposition genes by assessing phenotype-specific pathogenic variant (PV) frequencies, cancer risk associations, and performance of genetic testing criteria in a cohort of 165,000 patients referred for MGPT.

RESULTS

We identified extensive genetic heterogeneity surrounding predisposition to cancer types commonly referred for germline testing (breast, ovarian, colorectal, uterine/endometrial, pancreatic, and melanoma). PV frequencies were highest among patients with ovarian cancer (13.8%) and lowest among patients with melanoma (8.1%). Fewer than half of PVs identified in patients meeting testing criteria for only BRCA1/2 or only Lynch syndrome occurred in the respective genes (33.1% and 46.2%). In addition, 5.8% of patients with PVs in BRCA1/2 and 26.9% of patients with PVs in Lynch syndrome genes did not meet respective testing criteria.

CONCLUSION

Opportunities to improve upon identification of patients at risk for hereditary cancer predisposition include revising BRCA1/2 and Lynch syndrome testing criteria to include additional clinically actionable genes with overlapping phenotypes and relaxing testing criteria for associated cancers.

Classification of variants of uncertain significance in BRCA1 and BRCA2 using personal and family history of cancer from individuals in a large hereditary cancer multigene panel testing cohort

Purpose

Genetic testing of individuals often results in identification of genomic variants of unknown significance (VUS). Multiple lines of evidence are used to help determine the clinical significance of these variants.

Methods

We analyzed ~138,000 individuals tested by multigene panel testing (MGPT). We used logistic regression to predict carrier status based on personal and family history of cancer. This was applied to 4644 tested individuals carrying 2383 BRCA1/2 variants to calculate likelihood ratios informing pathogenicity for each. Heterogeneity tests were performed for specific classes of variants defined by in silico predictions.

Results

Twenty-two variants labeled as VUS had odds of >10:1 in favor of pathogenicity. The heterogeneity analysis found that among variants in functional domains that were predicted to be benign by in silico tools, a significantly higher proportion of variants were estimated to be pathogenic than previously indicated; that missense variants outside of functional domains should be considered benign; and that variants predicted to create de novo donor sites were also largely benign.

Conclusion

The evidence presented here supports the use of personal and family history from MGPT in the classification of VUS and will be integrated into ongoing efforts to provide large-scale multifactorial classification.

Assessment of Diagnostic Outcomes of RNA Genetic Testing for Hereditary Cancer

IMPORTANCE

Performing DNA genetic testing (DGT) for hereditary cancer genes is now a well-accepted clinical practice; however, the interpretation of DNA variation remains a challenge for laboratories and clinicians. Adding RNA genetic testing (RGT) enhances DGT by clarifying the clinical actionability of hereditary cancer gene variants, thus improving clinicians' ability to accurately apply strategies for cancer risk reduction and treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether RGT is associated with improvement in the diagnostic outcome of DGT and in the delivery of personalized cancer risk management for patients with hereditary cancer predisposition.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Diagnostic study in which patients and/or families with inconclusive variants detected by DGT in genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome, and hereditary diffuse gastric cancer sent blood samples for RGT from March 2016 to April 2018. Clinicians who ordered genetic testing and received a reclassification report for these variants were surveyed to assess whether RGT-related variant reclassifications changed clinical management of these patients. To quantify the potential number of tested individuals who could benefit from RGT, a cohort of 307 812 patients who underwent DGT for hereditary cancer were separately queried to identify variants predicted to affect splicing. Data analysis was conducted from March 2016 and September 2018.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Variant reclassification outcomes following RGT, clinical management changes associated with RGT-related variant reclassifications, and the proportion of patients who would likely be affected by a concurrent DGT and RGT multigene panel testing approach.

RESULTS

In total, 93 if 909 eligible families (10.2%) submitted samples for RGT. Evidence from RGT clarified the interpretation of 49 of 56 inconclusive cases (88%) studied; 26 (47%) were reclassified as clinically actionable and 23 (41%) were clarified as benign. Variant reclassifications based on RGT results changed clinical management recommendations for 8 of 18 patients (44%) and 14 of 18 families (78%), based on responses from 18 of 45 clinicians (40%) surveyed. A total of 7265 of 307 812 patients who underwent DGT had likely pathogenic variants or variants of uncertain significance potentially affecting splicing, indicating that approximately 1 in 43 individuals could benefit from RGT.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this diagnostic study, conducting RNA testing resolved a substantial proportion of variants of uncertain significance in a cohort of individuals previously tested for cancer predisposition by DGT. Performing RGT might change the diagnostic outcome of at least 1 in 43 patients if performed in all individuals undergoing genetic evaluation for hereditary cancer.

Differences in TP53 Mutation Carrier Phenotypes Emerge From Panel-Based Testing

Background

Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) has traditionally been identified by single-gene testing (SGT) of TP53 triggered by clinical criteria, but the widespread use of multigene panel tests (MGPTs) has upended this paradigm. We sought to compare the personal and family cancer histories of TP53-positive result (TP53+) carriers who were identified by either MGPT or SGT.

Methods

Of 44 310 individuals who underwent testing of TP53 in a single clinical diagnostic laboratory between 2010 and 2014, 44 086 (40 885 MGPT and 3201 SGT) met study eligibility criteria. Personal cancer histories were available for 38 938 subjects. The frequency of germline TP53 results and various phenotypic manifestations were compared according to test type. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results

MGPT TP53+ individuals (n = 126) had an older median age at first cancer than SGT TP53+ carriers (n = 96; women: median = 36 vs 28 years, P < .001; and men: median = 40 vs 15 years, P = .004). The median age of breast cancer diagnosis was 40 years in MGPT TP53+ women vs 33 years in SGT TP53+ women (P < .001). In both cohorts, childhood and LFS core cancers, and for women, multiple primary cancers (not multiple breast tumors), were associated with TP53+ results. Established LFS testing criteria were less often met by MGPT TP53+ individuals.

Conclusions

MGPT TP53+ individuals differ in phenotype from those ascertained through SGT and are notably older at cancer diagnosis and less likely to meet LFS clinical criteria. These findings suggest that LFS may have a greater phenotypic spectrum than previously appreciated. This has implications for the counseling of MGPT TP53+ individuals. Prospective follow-up of these individuals and families is needed to re-evaluate cancer risks.

Racial and ethnic differences in the results of multigene panel testing of inherited cancer predisposition genes in breast cancer patients

1514

Background: The prevalence of germline mutations in non-white patients with breast cancer and the germline genetic drivers of breast cancer risk in non-white populations are largely unknown. Methods: The study population included 77,900 women with breast cancer (Non-Hispanic white: 57,003; Black: 6,722; Asian: 4,183; Hispanic: 5,194; Ashkenazi-Jewish: 4,798) who underwent germline multigene panel testing of cancer predisposition genes from March 2012 to December 2016. The prevalence of predisposition gene mutations in racial and ethnic populations relative to non-Hispanic Whites was assessed while accounting for age at diagnosis of breast cancer, family history of breast and ovarian cancer, and estrogen receptor status of breast tumors. Associations between mutations in each gene and breast cancer risk were evaluated using reference controls. Results: The overall frequency of pathogenic mutations in known breast cancer predisposition genes was 9.1% for non-Hispanic Whites, 9.8% for African Americans, 10.2% for Hispanics, 7.6% for Ashkenazi-Jewish, and 7.5% for Asians. BRCA1 mutations were enriched (p < 0.05) and CHEK2 mutations were under-represented in all racial and ethnic populations relative to non-Hispanic Whites. BRCA2 and BARD1 mutations were enriched in African Americans and Hispanics relative to non-Hispanic Whites, whereas PALB2 and RAD51C mutations were enriched in Hispanics. Among genes with mutation counts large enough for assessment, mutations in BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2 and TP53 were significantly associated with clinically relevant increased risks (odds ratio (OR) > 2) of breast cancer across all ethnicities and races. Rates of variants of uncertain significance were highest among Asians (29%), followed by blacks (27%), Hispanics (21%), non-Hispanic whites (16%) and Ashkenazi-Jews (14%). Conclusions: While there is some similarity across ethnic groups, substantial heterogeneity exists in the prevalence of mutations in breast cancer predisposition genes across major racial and ethnic groups in the US population. These findings contribute to our understanding of breast cancer risk and have significant implications for genetic testing, screening, and management of patients with an inherited predisposition to breast cancer, with a need for continued analysis with increased cohort size in ethnic minority groups.

Family communication and patient distress after germline genetic testing in individuals with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Germline genetic testing currently is recommended for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In the current study, the authors assessed how often results are communicated to first-degree relatives within 3 months and the emotional impact of testing on patients.

METHODS

A total of 148 patients who were newly diagnosed with PDAC and who had undergone testing of 32 cancer susceptibility genes at 3 academic centers were selected; 71% participated. Subjects completed the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) and a family communication survey. The results of both surveys were assessed at 3 months according to the genetic test result (positive, negative, or variant of unknown significance [VUS]) and whether a patient met criteria for genetic testing.

RESULTS

A total of 99 patients completed the MICRA survey and 104 completed the family communication survey. The average age of the patients was 67 years, 47% were female, 29% had stage III/IV (AJCC 8th edition) disease, and 42% met genetic testing criteria. Approximately 80% of patients told at least 1 first-degree relative about their result. There was a trend toward greater disclosure among patients who tested positive (93% vs 77% for those with a VUS result [P = .149] and 74% for those who tested negative [P = .069]). Patients not meeting genetic testing criteria were less likely to disclose results (69% vs 93%; P = .003). MICRA scores did not differ by test result, age, stage of disease, or sex.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of result communication was high, although it was lower among patients who did not meet genetic testing criteria, those who tested negative, or those who had a VUS result. Testing-associated distress was similar across patient groups, and was comparable to that reported by other patients with cancer. Improved communication for all patients is crucial given the prognosis of PDAC, which limits time for disclosure.

Genetic counseling processes and outcomes among prostate cancer patients (ProGen)

TPS343

Background: Prostate cancer (PC) is among the leading causes of cancer mortality in males. Recent studies found 8-12% of advanced PC cases may be hereditary. Germline mutations have been reported in BRCA1/2, other DNA repair genes including ATM, CHEK2, PALB2 and DNA mismatch repair genes. Genetic testing can inform treatment decisions including drug targeting, such as PARP inhibitors for men with BRCA mutations, and checkpoint inhibitors for those with pathogenic mutations in mismatch repair genes2. Discovering a pathogenic mutation associated with increased cancer risk also prompts dissemination of this information to family, where subsequent testing can lead to risk stratification and impactful opportunities for cancer screening and prevention. It is critical that men with high risk and potentially lethal prostate cancer routinely be offered genetic testing as a component of their cancer care. Genetic counseling services are limited, and more efficient services are needed. Methods: We are investigating video education prior to genetic testing compared with in-person pretest counseling with a licensed genetic counselor (GC). ProGen is an ongoing randomized trial evaluating two distinct models of cancer genetics service delivery in 450 PC cases over a two-year period. The study is conducted in collaboration with Ambry Genetics utilizing a 67-gene cancer panel. The primary aim is analysis of the proportion and type of germline mutations identified. Secondary aims include testing uptake by arm, evaluation of distress, knowledge, satisfaction with testing services, family communication, and impact on cancer care. Results are communicated by telephone with a GC. Inclusion criteria are: potentially lethal PC (metastatic, localized with Gleason score ≥8, rising/persistent PSA after local therapy), early diagnosis (≤ 55 years), prior malignancy, and/or family history potentially indicating a hereditary cancer risk. Enrollment is 74% completed at a single institution. (NCT03328091). 1 Pritchard CC, et al. Inherited DNA‐repair gene mutations in men with metastatic prostate cancer. NEJM. 2016;375:443 2 Mateo J, et al. DNA-Repair Defects and Olaparib in Metastatic Prostate Cancer. NEJM . 2015;373(18):1697-1708 Clinical trial information: NCT03328091.

Quality of Clinician-Reported Cancer History When Ordering Genetic Testing

Purpose

Clinical history data reported on test requisition forms (TRFs) for hereditary cancer multigene panel testing (MGPT) are routinely used by genetic testing laboratories. More recently, publications have incorporated TRF-based clinical data into studies exploring yield of testing by phenotype and estimating cancer risks for mutation carriers. We aimed to assess the quality of TRF data for patients undergoing MGPT.

Patients and Methods

Ten percent of patients who underwent hereditary cancer MGPT between January and June 2015 at a clinical laboratory were randomly selected. TRF-reported cancer diagnoses were evaluated for completeness and accuracy for probands and relatives using clinical documents such as pedigrees and chart notes as the comparison standard in cases where these documents were submitted after the time of test order.

Results

TRF-reported cancer sites and ages at diagnosis were complete for > 90.0% of proband cancer diagnoses overall, and the completion rate was even higher (> 96.0%) for breast, ovarian, colorectal, and uterine cancers. When reported, these data were accurate on TRFs for > 99.5% of proband cancer sites and > 97.5% of proband ages at diagnosis. Cancer site and age at diagnosis data were also complete on the TRF for the majority of cancers among first- and second-degree relatives. Completeness decreased as relation to the proband became more distant, whereas accuracy remained high across all degrees of relation.

Conclusion

Data collected as part of cancer genetic risk assessment is completely and accurately reported on TRFs for the majority of probands and their close relatives and is comparable to information directly obtained from clinic notes, particularly for breast and other cancers commonly associated with hereditary cancer syndromes.

Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Risk Genes Identified by Multigene Hereditary Cancer Panel Testing

BACKGROUND

Germline genetic testing with hereditary cancer gene panels can identify women at increased risk of breast cancer. However, those at increased risk of triple-negative (estrogen receptor-negative, progesterone receptor-negative, human epidermal growth factor receptor-negative) breast cancer (TNBC) cannot be identified because predisposition genes for TNBC, other than BRCA1, have not been established. The aim of this study was to define the cancer panel genes associated with increased risk of TNBC.

METHODS

Multigene panel testing for 21 genes in 8753 TNBC patients was performed by a clinical testing laboratory, and testing for 17 genes in 2148 patients was conducted by a Triple Negative Breast Cancer Consortium (TNBCC) of research studies. Associations between deleterious mutations in cancer predisposition genes and TNBC were evaluated using results from TNBC patients and reference controls.

RESULTS

Germline pathogenic variants in BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and RAD51D were associated with high risk (odds ratio > 5.0) of TNBC and greater than 20% lifetime risk for overall breast cancer among Caucasians. Pathogenic variants in BRIP1, RAD51C, and TP53 were associated with moderate risk (odds ratio > 2) of TNBC. Similar trends were observed for the African American population. Pathogenic variants in these TNBC genes were detected in 12.0% (3.7% non-BRCA1/2) of all participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Multigene hereditary cancer panel testing can identify women with elevated risk of TNBC due to mutations in BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and RAD51D. These women can potentially benefit from improved screening, risk management, and cancer prevention strategies. Patients with mutations may also benefit from specific targeted therapeutic strategies.

Multigene Hereditary Cancer Panels Reveal High-Risk Pancreatic Cancer Susceptibility Genes

PURPOSE

The relevance of inherited pathogenic mutations in cancer predisposition genes in pancreatic cancer is not well understood. We aimed to assess the characteristics of patients with pancreatic cancer referred for hereditary cancer genetic testing and to estimate the risk of pancreatic cancer associated with mutations in panel-based cancer predisposition genes in this high-risk population.

METHODS

Patients with pancreatic cancer (N = 1,652) were identified from a 140,000-patient cohort undergoing multigene panel testing of predisposition genes between March 2012 and June 2016. Gene-level mutation frequencies relative to Exome Aggregation Consortium and Genome Aggregation Database reference controls were assessed.

RESULTS

The frequency of germline cancer predisposition gene mutations among patients with pancreatic cancer was 20.73%. Mutations in ATM, BRCA2, CDKN2A, MSH2, MSH6, PALB2, and TP53 were associated with high pancreatic cancer risk (odds ratio, > 5), and mutations in BRCA1 were associated with moderate risk (odds ratio, > 2). In a logistic regression model adjusted for age at diagnosis and family history of cancer, ATM and BRCA2 mutations were associated with personal history of breast or pancreatic cancer, whereas PALB2 mutations were associated with family history of breast or pancreatic cancer.

CONCLUSION

These findings provide insight into the spectrum of mutations expected in patients with pancreatic cancer referred for cancer predisposition testing. Mutations in eight genes confer high or moderate risk of pancreatic cancer and may prove useful for risk assessment for pancreatic and other cancers. Family and personal histories of breast cancer are strong predictors of germline mutations.

Abstract P6-09-02: Associations between hereditary cancer panel predisposition genes and breast cancer histological subtypes

Background: Clinical panel testing has become routine practice for patients that are diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age and/or have a personal or family history of cancer. Associations with known breast cancer genes and breast cancer subtypes have been previously identified, such as BRCA1 associations with estrogen receptor negative (ER-) and triple negative (ER-/PR-/HER2-) breast cancers. However, the cancer predisposition genes associated with each of the four clinical subtypes of breast cancer have not been fully defined. We evaluated 24,901 Caucasian female breast cancer cases receiving clinical panel testing for 23 cancer predisposition genes and assessed associations between mutations in each gene and breast cancer subtypes.

Methods: Germline hereditary cancer multigene panel testing results for cancer predisposition genes were obtained for 24,901 Caucasian female breast cancer cases evaluated by a clinical testing laboratory. Information on tumor histology, personal and family history of cancer, age at diagnosis, and previous genetic testing was provided by clinical care providers of patients receiving clinical cancer genetic testing. Breast cancer cases were classified into clinical breast cancer subtypes based on estrogen/progesterone hormone receptor status (HR) and HER2 status: Luminal A (HR+/HER2-), Luminal B (HR+/HER2-), HER2 subtype (HR-/HER2+), and Triple Negative (HR-/HER2-). The frequency of pathogenic or likely pathogenic mutations observed in each subtype was compared against the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) non-TCGA non-Finnish European population to estimate risks.

Results: ATM was associated with moderate risks (odds ratio (OR)&gt;2.0) of Luminal A, Luminal B, and HER2 subtypes of breast cancer, but was not associated with the Triple Negative subtype. PALB2 was associated with moderate risk for Luminal B subtype, but high risk (OR&gt;5.0) for Luminal A, HER2, and triple negative subtypes. TP53 was associated with high risks for Luminal B and HER2 tumors. NBN, MRE11A, and RAD50 were not associated with any subtype of breast cancer.

Conclusions: Identifying associations between inherited mutations (odds ratio (OR)&gt;2.0) and breast cancer subtypes can inform clinical risk management, treatment options, and therapeutic development efforts.

Citation Format: Lilyquist J, Laduca H, Hu C, Na J, Polley EC, Hart SN, Pesaran T, Tippin-Davis B, Goldgar DE, Dolinsky JS, Couch FJ. Associations between hereditary cancer panel predisposition genes and breast cancer histological subtypes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-09-02.

Abstract PD1-01: Triple negative breast cancer predisposition genes

Background: Germline cancer testing panels provide an effective method for identifying individuals at increased risk for breast cancer. However, estimates of risk for triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) (estrogen receptor-negative, progesterone receptor-negative, HER2-negative) associated with pathogenic mutations in panel genes have not been established. We sought to define the genes that contribute to TNBC.

Methods:Germline hereditary cancer multigene panel testing results were obtained for 8,753 TNBCs evaluated by a clinical testing laboratory. Associations between pathogenic mutations in individual genes and TNBC were assessed by comparing mutation frequencies in TNBCs and in the Exome Aggregation Consortium, non-Finn European, non-Cancer Genome Atlas reference controls.

Results: Inactivating mutations in 21 known cancer predisposition genes were identified in 14.6% of TNBCs. BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, BARD1, and RAD51D alterations were associated with high risks (odds ratio(OR)&gt;5.0) of TNBC and variants in BRIP1, RAD51C, MSH6, and TP53 were associated with moderate risks (OR&gt;2). In contrast, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, and RAD50 yielded no clinically relevant risks of TNBC. Pathogenic mutations in these established non-BRCA1/2 TNBC susceptibility genes were detected in 6.3% of TNBCs. Similar trends were observed among African American TNBCs. Overall, 5.5% of TNBCs with pathogenic mutations did not meet NCCN clinical testing criteria for BRCA1/2 due to a lack of significant family history and diagnosis over the age of 60.

Conclusions: The identification of genes associated with elevated risk of TNBC will improve understanding of the etiology of this aggressive form of breast cancer and inform risk management of individuals receiving panel testing. The high frequency of pathogenic variants suggests that all patients with TNBC, regardless of age of diagnosis or family history of cancer, should be considered for multigene panel testing.

Citation Format: Couch FJ, Shimelis H, LaDuca H, Hu C, Hart SN, Polley EC, Pesaran T, Tippin-Davis B, Goldgar DE, Dolinsky JS. Triple negative breast cancer predisposition genes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD1-01.

Unexpected CDH1 Mutations Identified on Multigene Panels Pose Clinical Management Challenges

Purpose

Mutations in the CDH1 gene confer up to an 80% lifetime risk of diffuse gastric cancer and up to a 60% lifetime risk of lobular breast cancer. Testing for CDH1 mutations is recommended for individuals who meet the International Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium (IGCLC) guidelines. However, the interpretation of unexpected CDH1 mutations identified in patients who do not meet IGCLC criteria or do not have phenotypes suggestive of hereditary diffuse gastric cancer is clinically challenging. This study aims to describe phenotypes of CDH1 mutation carriers identified through multigene panel testing (MGPT) and to offer informed recommendations for medical management.

Patients and Methods

This cross-sectional prevalence study included all patients who underwent MGPT between March 2012 and September 2014 from a commercial laboratory (n = 26,936) and an academic medical center cancer genetics clinic (n = 318) to estimate CDH1 mutation prevalence and associated clinical phenotypes. CDH1 mutation carriers were classified as IGCLC positive (met criteria), IGCLC partial phenotype, and IGCLC negative.

Results

In the laboratory cohort, 16 (0.06%) of 26,936 patients were identified as having a pathogenic CDH1 mutation. In the clinic cohort, four (1.26%) of 318 had a pathogenic CDH1 mutation. Overall, 65% of mutation carriers did not meet the revised testing criteria published in 2015. All three CDH1 mutation carriers who had risk-reducing gastrectomy had pathologic evidence of diffuse gastric cancer despite not having met IGCLC criteria.

Conclusion

The majority of CDH1 mutations identified on MGPT are unexpected and found in individuals who do not fit the accepted diagnostic testing criteria. These test results alter the medical management of CDH1-positive patients and families and provide opportunities for early detection and risk reduction.

Associations Between Cancer Predisposition Testing Panel Genes and Breast Cancer

IMPORTANCE

Germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 predispose to an increased lifetime risk of breast cancer. However, the relevance of germline variants in other genes from multigene hereditary cancer testing panels is not well defined.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the risks of breast cancer associated with germline variants in cancer predisposition genes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A study population of 65 057 patients with breast cancer receiving germline genetic testing of cancer predisposition genes with hereditary cancer multigene panels. Associations between pathogenic variants in non-BRCA1 and non-BRCA2 predisposition genes and breast cancer risk were estimated in a case-control analysis of patients with breast cancer and Exome Aggregation Consortium reference controls. The women underwent testing between March 15, 2012, and June 30, 2016.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Breast cancer risk conferred by pathogenic variants in non-BRCA1 and non-BRCA2 predisposition genes.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) age at diagnosis for the 65 057 women included in the analysis was 48.5 (11.1) years. The frequency of pathogenic variants in 21 panel genes identified in 41 611 consecutively tested white women with breast cancer was estimated at 10.2%. After exclusion of BRCA1, BRCA2, and syndromic breast cancer genes (CDH1, PTEN, and TP53), observed pathogenic variants in 5 of 16 genes were associated with high or moderately increased risks of breast cancer: ATM (OR, 2.78; 95% CI, 2.22-3.62), BARD1 (OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.31-3.63), CHEK2 (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.31-1.67), PALB2 (OR, 7.46; 95% CI, 5.12-11.19), and RAD51D (OR, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.21-7.88). Conversely, variants in the BRIP1 and RAD51C ovarian cancer risk genes; the MRE11A, RAD50, and NBN MRN complex genes; the MLH1 and PMS2 mismatch repair genes; and NF1 were not associated with increased risks of breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study establishes several panel genes as high- and moderate-risk breast cancer genes and provides estimates of breast cancer risk associated with pathogenic variants in these genes among individuals qualifying for clinical genetic testing.

Germline genetic testing in unselected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients

1501

Background: The aim of this study is to assess the prevalence of known heritable germline mutations in unselected PDAC patients and to determine how well current guidelines for genetic testing identify mutation carriers. Methods: Consecutive, unselected patients with recently diagnosed PDAC from three centers were enrolled from May to December 2016 in an ongoing prospective study. A three-generation pedigree was obtained. Germline mutations in 12 genes associated with PDAC risk ( APC, ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDKN2A, EPCAM, MLH1, MSH2, PALB2, PMS2, STK11, TP53) and in 19 genes related to other cancer risks were screened for by NGS. American College of Gastroenterology and NCCN criteria for genetic testing for BRCA1/2, Lynch syndrome, and Familial Pancreatic Cancer (FPC) were assessed. Results: Among 183 patients, 46% are female, 79% are Caucasian and 10% are Ashkenazi Jewish, with median (IQR) age 68 (62,75) years at diagnosis. 41% of patients met ³1 criteria for genetic testing (35.5% BRCA1/2, 2.7% Lynch, 9.3% FPC). Twenty patients (11%) were found to have a total of 21 pathogenic mutations (table). Mutation status was not associated with age at diagnosis, sex, or personal history of cancer (all p > 0.05). Six mutation carriers (30% of positives) did not meet current criteria for genetic testing. Conclusions: Preliminary results show that 6.6% of unselected PDAC patients carry a germline mutation in a gene known to increase PDAC risk and 4.3% have a mutation in genes not previously linked to PDAC. Existing testing criteria did not identify 30% of carriers. Continued refinement of guidelines is necessary to align genetic testing with inherited PDAC risk. Clinical trial information: NCT02790944. [Table: see text]

Abstract S2-01: Breast cancer risks associated with mutations in cancer predisposition genes identified by clinical genetic testing of 60,000 breast cancer patients

Clinical genetic testing panels are broadly used to gather information about cancer predisposition in individuals with personal and/or family history of breast cancer. However, the involvement of several of the genes on clinical testing panels in predisposition to breast cancer, such as MRE11A and RAD50, has recently come into question. In addition, accurate risk estimates for breast and other cancer are not well defined for the majority of genes on testing panels. We studied 60,000 women diagnosed with breast cancer who were tested for germline cancer predisposing mutations using hereditary cancer gene panels. Information on personal and family cancer history, age of diagnosis, and ethnicity of patients was obtained from test requisition forms. Greater than 90% met National Comprehensive Cancer Network HBOC testing criteria. To estimate gene-specific risks for breast cancer, case-control analyses were performed comparing the frequencies of pathogenic mutations from Caucasian cancer cases with frequencies from Caucasian, non-Finnish, non-TCGA controls from the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) database. Mutations were detected in 9% of breast cancer patients. Twelve genes displayed a significant association (p&lt;0.05) with breast cancer. Nine of these genes, including ATM, RAD51D, NF1, and MSH6, were associated with moderate risk (RR&gt;2.0) of breast cancer and three genes (BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2) were associated with high risk (RR&gt;5.0) of breast cancer. Cumulative age-dependent risk models were developed for each gene. This large clinical testing dataset of 60,000 women with breast cancer provides useful data for many predisposition genes previously lacking risk estimates, and should prove useful for clinical risk management of patients with inherited mutations in these genes.

Citation Format: Couch FJ, Hu C, Lilyquist J, Shimelis H, Akinhanmi M, Na J, Polley EC, Hart SN, McFarland R, LaDuca H, Huether R, Goldgar DE, Dolinsky JS. Breast cancer risks associated with mutations in cancer predisposition genes identified by clinical genetic testing of 60,000 breast cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr S2-01.

Abstract P5-09-03: Associations between breast cancer subtypes and mutations in cancer predisposition genes identified by clinical genetic testing of breast cancer patients

Clinical genetic testing of individuals with a personal or family history of breast and ovarian cancer using panels for BRCA1/2 and other candidate cancer predisposition genes has become routine clinical practice. Several of the genes on hereditary cancer testing panels have been strongly associated with specific subtypes of breast cancer. In particular, individuals with germline mutations in BRCA1 predominantly develop estrogen receptor (ER)-negative and triple negative (TN) (estrogen receptor negative, progesterone receptor negative, HER2 negative) breast tumors. In contrast, CHEK2 and ATM mutations have been associated with ER-positive breast cancer. In this study, associations between mutations in panel genes and breast cancer subtypes were evaluated. A cohort of 60,000 breast cancer patients tested for germline cancer predisposing mutations using hereditary cancer gene panels was utilized. Information on personal and family cancer history, age of diagnosis, tumor pathology, and ethnicity of patients was obtained from test requisition forms or by follow up with ordering health care providers. Mutations in each gene were combined into four histological subtypes (triple negative; HER2 positive; ER-positive,HER2-positive; and ER-positive,HER2 negative). Associations for each subtype were estimated by case-control analyses comparing the frequencies of pathogenic mutations in each subtype with frequencies from non-TCGA controls from the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) database. In addition, case-case analyses were conducted to assess enrichment of gene mutations in specific breast cancer subtypes. Among the observed associations between genes and breast cancer subtypes, mutations in CHEK2 and ATM were highly enriched in luminal breast cancers and BARD1 was specifically associated with TN breast cancer. Refining the spectrum of pathological correlates with mutations in hereditary breast cancer genes will aid gene specific cancer risk management, and may accelerate the development of novel gene-specific therapeutic interventions.

Citation Format: Couch FJ, Lilyquist J, Na J, Hu C, Polley EC, Shimelis H, Akinhanmi M, McFarland R, LaDuca H, Goldgar DE, Dolinsky JS. Associations between breast cancer subtypes and mutations in cancer predisposition genes identified by clinical genetic testing of breast cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-09-03.

Male breast cancer in a multi-gene panel testing cohort: insights and unexpected results

Purpose

Genetic predisposition to male breast cancer (MBC) is not well understood. The aim of this study was to better define the predisposition genes contributing to MBC and the utility of germline multi-gene panel testing (MGPT) for explaining the etiology of MBCs.

Methods

Clinical histories and molecular results were retrospectively reviewed for 715 MBC patients who underwent MGPT from March 2012 to June 2016.

Results

The detection rate of MGPT was 18.1% for patients tested for variants in 16 breast cancer susceptibility genes and with no prior BRCA1/2 testing. BRCA2 and CHEK2 were the most frequently mutated genes (11.0 and 4.1% of patients with no prior BRCA1/2 testing, respectively). Pathogenic variants in BRCA2 [odds ratio (OR) = 13.9; p = 1.92 × 10⁻¹⁶], CHEK2 (OR = 3.7; p = 6.24 × 10⁻²⁴), and PALB2 (OR = 6.6, p = 0.01) were associated with significantly increased risks of MBC. The average age at diagnosis of MBC was similar for patients with (64 years) and without (62 years) pathogenic variants. CHEK2 1100delC carriers had a significantly lower average age of diagnosis (n = 7; 54 years) than all others with pathogenic variants (p = 0.03). No significant differences were observed between history of additional primary cancers (non-breast) and family history of male breast cancer for patients with and without pathogenic variants. However, patients with pathogenic variants in BRCA2 were more likely to have a history of multiple primary breast cancers.

Conclusion

These data suggest that all MBC patients regardless of age of diagnosis, history of multiple primary cancers, or family history of MBC should be offered MGPT.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10549-016-4085-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.