Search

Germline pathogenic variants (GPVs) in the cancer predisposition genes BRCA1, BRCA2, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, BRIP1, PALB2, RAD51Dand RAD51Care identified in approximately 15% of patients with ovarian cancer (OC). While there are clear guidelines around clinical management of cancer risk in patients with GPV in BRCA1, BRCA2, MLH1, MSH2and MSH6, there are few guidelines on how to manage the more moderate OC risk in patients with GPV in BRIP1, PALB2, RAD51Dand RAD51C, with clinical questions about appropriateness and timing of risk-reducing gynaecological surgery. Furthermore, while recognition of RAD51Cand RAD51Das OC predisposition genes has been established for several years, an association with breast cancer (BC) has only more recently been described and clinical management of this risk has been unclear. With expansion of genetic testing of these genes to all patients with non-mucinous OC, new data on BC risk and improved estimates of OC risk, the UK Cancer Genetics Group and CanGene-CanVar project convened a 2-day meeting to reach a national consensus on clinical management of BRIP1, PALB2, RAD51Dand RAD51Ccarriers in clinical practice. In this paper, we present a summary of the processes used to reach and agree on a consensus, as well as the key recommendations from the meeting.

BackgroundOur study aimed to establish ‘real-world’ performance and cost-effectiveness of ovarian cancer (OC) surveillance in women with pathogenic germline BRCA1/2variants who defer risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO).MethodsOur study recruited 875 female BRCA1/2-heterozygotes at 13 UK centres and via an online media campaign, with 767 undergoing at least one 4-monthly surveillance test with the Risk of Ovarian Cancer Algorithm (ROCA) test. Surveillance performance was calculated with modelling of occult cancers detected at RRSO. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated using Markov population cohort simulation.ResultsOur study identified 8 OCs during 1277 women screen years: 2 occult OCs at RRSO (both stage 1a), and 6 screen-detected; 3 of 6 (50%) were ≤stage 3a and 5 of 6 (83%) were completely surgically cytoreduced. Modelled sensitivity, specificity, Positive Predictive Value (PPV) and Negative Predictive Value (NPV) for OC were 87.5% (95% CI, 47.3 to 99.7), 99.9% (99.9–100), 75% (34.9–96.8) and 99.9% (99.9–100), respectively. The predicted number of quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained by surveillance was 0.179 with an ICER cost-saving of -£102,496/QALY.ConclusionOC surveillance for women deferring RRSO in a ‘real-world’ setting is feasible and demonstrates similar performance to research trials; it down-stages OC, leading to a high complete cytoreduction rate and is cost-saving in the UK National Health Service (NHS) setting. While RRSO remains recommended management, ROCA-based surveillance may be considered for female BRCA-heterozygotes who are deferring such surgery.

Advances in genomics are enabling the early recognition of hereditary prostate cancer with important diagnostic and prognostic implications, helping with access to personalised targeted therapies and opportunities for early cancer detection and prevention.

Cancer susceptibility syndromes confer an increased lifetime risk of cancer and occur due to germline likely-pathogenic or pathogenic variants in a cancer susceptibility gene. Clinical Genetics services advise patients of ways to manage their future cancer risks, often prefaced with uncertainties due to poor understandings of individualised risk. For individuals/couples whose future offspring are at risk of a cancer susceptibility syndrome, different options are available depending on their preferences and circumstances, including prenatal diagnosis and preimplantation genetic testing. This review provides an overview of the most common cancer susceptibility syndromes, available reproductive options and a genetic counselling framework recommended to support individuals/couples in their decision-making. We describe complexities of decision-making involving moderate penetrance and sex-specific variable penetrance genes and explore associated ethical issues arising in this complex area of medicine.

Clinical testing with chromosomal microarray (CMA) is most commonly undertaken for clinical indications such as intellectual disability, dysmorphic features and/or congenital abnormalities. Identification of a structural aberration (SA) involving a cancer susceptibility gene (CSG) constitutes a type of incidental or secondary finding. Laboratory reporting, risk communication and clinical management of these structural aberrations with secondary implications (SASIs) is currently inconsistent. We undertake meta-analysis of 18 622 instances of CMA performed for unrelated indications in which 106 SASIs are identified involving in total 40 different CSGs. Here we present the recommendations of a joint UK working group representing the British Society of Genomic Medicine, UK Cancer Genetics Group and UK Association for Clinical Genomic Science. SASIs are categorised into four groups, defined by the type of SA and the cancer risk. For each group, recommendations are provided regarding reflex parental testing and cancer risk management.

Variant classifications may change over time, driven by emergence of fresh or contradictory evidence or evolution in weighing or combination of evidence items. For variant classifications above the actionability threshold, which is classification of likely pathogenic or pathogenic, clinical actions may be irreversible, such as risk-reducing surgery or prenatal interventions. Variant reclassification up or down across the actionability threshold can therefore have significant clinical consequences. Laboratory approaches to variant reinterpretation and reclassification vary widely.