Jessica Profato

Breast Cancer, BRCA Mutations, and Attitudes Regarding Pregnancy and Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis

BACKGROUND Women with premenopausal breast cancer may face treatment-related infertility and have a higher likelihood of a BRCA mutation, which may affect their attitudes toward future childbearing. METHODS Premenopausal women were invited to participate in a questionnaire study administered before and after BRCA genetic testing. We used the Impact of Event Scale (IES) to evaluate the pre- and post-testing impact of cancer or carrying a BRCA mutation on attitudes toward future childbearing. The likelihood of pursuing prenatal diagnosis (PND) or preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) was also assessed in this setting. Univariate analyses determined factors contributing to attitudes toward future childbearing and likelihood of PND or PGD. RESULTS One hundred forty-eight pretesting and 114 post-testing questionnaires were completed. Women with a personal history of breast cancer had less change in IES than those with no history of breast cancer (p = .003). The 18 BRCA-positive women had a greater change in IES than the BRCA-negative women (p = .005). After testing, 31% and 24% of women would use PND and PGD, respectively. BRCA results did not significantly affect attitudes toward PND/PGD. CONCLUSION BRCA results and history of breast cancer affect the psychological impact on future childbearing. Intentions to undergo PND or PGD do not appear to change after disclosure of BRCA results. Additional counseling for patients who have undergone BRCA testing may be warranted to educate patients about available fertility preservation options.

Cancer Incidence in First- and Second-Degree Relatives of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers

BACKGROUND Mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are associated with increased risk of breast, ovarian, and several other cancers. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the incidence of cancer in first- and second-degree relatives of BRCA mutation carriers compared with the general population. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 1,086 pedigrees of BRCA mutation carriers was obtained from a prospectively maintained, internal review board-approved study of persons referred for clinical genetic counseling at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. We identified 9,032 first- and second-degree relatives from 784 pedigrees that had demonstrated a clear indication of parental origin of mutation. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were used to compare the observed incidence of 20 primary cancer sites to the expected incidence of each cancer based on the calculated risk estimates according to each subjects age, sex, and ethnicity. RESULTS BRCA1 families had increased SIRs for breast and ovarian cancer (p < .001) and decreased SIRs for kidney, lung, prostate, and thyroid cancer and non-Hodgkins lymphoma (p < .001). BRCA2 families had increased SIRs for breast, ovarian, and pancreatic cancer (p < .001) and decreased SIRs for kidney, lung, thyroid, and uterine cancer and non-Hodgkins lymphoma (p < .0025). Analysis of only first-degree relatives (n = 4,099) identified no decreased SIRs and agreed with the increased SIRs observed in the overall study population. CONCLUSION We have confirmed previous reports of an association between breast, ovarian, and pancreatic cancers with BRCA mutations. Additional research to quantify the relative risks of these cancers for BRCA mutation carriers can help tailor recommendations for risk reduction and enhance genetic counseling. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE BRCA gene mutations have been well described to carry an increased risk of both breast and ovarian cancer. However, the implications and risks of other cancers continues to be investigated. Evaluating the risks for other cancers further is key in identifying and managing risk reduction strategies.

High incidence of germline BRCA mutation in patients with ER low-positive/PR low-positive/HER-2 neu negative tumors.

The 2015 National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend that genetic counseling and germline BRCA mutation testing be offered to women under age 60 with triple‐negative breast cancer (TNBC). As a result of the 2010 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guidelines for breast cancer, patients with breast cancers that are estrogen receptor (ER) or progesterone receptor (PR) low‐positive (1%‐9% on immunohistochemistry) are no longer strictly considered to have TNBC and may not be referred for genetic counseling. However, the incidence of BRCA mutation in patients with hormone receptor (HR) low‐positive breast cancers remains unknown, and current ASCO/CAP guidelines may result in undertesting for BRCA mutations.

Predictors that influence election of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among women with ductal carcinoma in situ who are BRCA-negative

The authors retrospectively examined the contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rate among 100 women with ductal carcinoma in situ who are BRCA negative. Of 100 women with ductal carcinoma in situ, 31 elected contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM). Factors associated with increased likelihood of undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) among this cohort were: family history of ovarian cancer, marital status, reconstruction, mastectomy of the affected breast, and tamoxifen use.

Assessing the integration of genomic medicine in genetic counseling training programs.

Medical genetics has entered a period of transition from genetics to genomics. Genetic counselors (GCs) may take on roles in the clinical implementation of genomics. This study explores the perspectives of program directors (PDs) on including genomic medicine in GC training programs, as well as the status of this integration. Study methods included an online survey, an optional one-on-one telephone interview, and an optional curricula content analysis. The majority of respondents (15/16) reported that it is important to include genomic medicine in program curricula. Most topics of genomic medicine are either “currently taught” or “under development” in all participating programs. Interview data from five PDs and one faculty member supported the survey data. Integrating genomics in training programs is challenging, and it is essential to develop genomics resources for curricula.

Breast cancer in the young: role of the geneticist

The genetics professional plays an important role in the care of young women with breast cancer by providing counseling on issues specific to these young women. The issues addressed in counseling include hereditary predisposition to cancer, fertility and reproductive options in the context of hereditary cancer, and the impact and implications of their history of early breast cancer on close family members. A thorough risk assessment and counseling session address the patients personal and family history, with particular attention paid to benign and malignant findings that suggest the need for genetic testing. Genetics professionals, especially genetic counselors, also address the physical and emotional implications of an increased risk of cancer with patients and family members. This review highlights the unique aspects of care provided by these specialized healthcare providers.

Service Delivery Model and Experiences in a Cancer Genetics Clinic for an Underserved Population

This report describes a genetics clinic for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) in an underserved population. Genetic counseling was provided to 151 patients, and 131 underwent BRCA genetic testing. This was a unique, group-based establishment of an HBOC genetics clinic, which to our knowledge had not previously been reported.

Genetic risk assessment for breast and gynecological malignancies.

Purpose of review Breast cancer and gynecological cancers impact a significant portion of women each year. Identifying women at high risk is essential for implementation of screening and risk reduction recommendations. Risk assessment for these cancers involves an evaluation of many factors. This review discusses an overview of hereditary breast and gynecological cancers and the process of a cancer genetic risk assessment. Recent findings Risk assessment models for breast cancer should be used with caution, especially in populations in which they are not validated. Additionally, the BRCAPRO model may underestimate the likelihood of BRCA mutations in certain populations. The utilization of next-generation sequencing panels is increasing. Benefits and limitations of panel testing are described in the literature. There are currently no guidelines for the use of panel testing; however, some reports of institutional experiences and recommendations are available. Summary Cancer genetic risk assessment is complex, and models developed to estimate risk may not apply to all populations. Identifying genetic factors related to cancer risk is also becoming increasingly complex with the clinical implementation of panel testing. This testing approach should be critically evaluated by healthcare providers. Further research is needed to create evidence-based guidelines for panel testing and management recommendations for moderately penetrant genes.

Importance of genetic testing for patients with multiple colorectal cancer primaries.

528Background: Individuals with hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) may be at increased risk for a second primary CRC. Therefore, a personal history of multiple CRCs may be considered an indication for genetic testing. Methods: Multi-gene panel test (MGPT) results and age at CRC diagnoses were reviewed for 7046 CRC patients who underwent testing from March 2012 to June 2016. Depending on the panel ordered, analysis of up to 49 genes associated with CRC and/or other cancers was performed. The diagnostic yield and age at CRC diagnoses were compared between patients with a history of one CRC (n=6739) and those with two or more CRCs (n=307). Results: Individuals with a history of multiple CRCs had an overall positive rate of 23.8% (n=73), as compared to 12.4% (n=836) in those with a history of one CRC (OR=2.2; p=1.1E-7; 95%CI [1.653,2.907]). In the multiple CRCs group, 77 mutations were identified as follows: MLH1 (n=29), MSH2 (n=18), MSH6 (n=5), PMS2 (n=5), biallelic MUTYH (n=5), CHEK2 (n=5), APC (n=2), BRCA2...