Search

Next‐generation tumor tissue sequencing techniques may result in the detection of putative germline pathogenic variants (PVs), raising the possibility that germline cancer predisposition could be identified from archival medical tissue samples of deceased relatives. The approach, termed traceback, is designed to inform risk management recommendations for living family members. Provider perspectives regarding traceback testing have not yet been explored, so we conducted a cross‐sectional survey of Clinical Cancer Genomics Community of Practice providers regarding their attitudes and beliefs toward traceback testing. Self‐reported demographics, provider characteristics, attitudes and perceived barriers were collected. We evaluated responses in the context of whether providers had previous experience with traceback testing. Data were analyzed using chi‐square and Fisher's exact testing. Among 207 respondents (of 816 eligible), most were women (89.4%), white (85.5%), and not Hispanic or Latino (89.7%). US‐based providers represented the majority of respondents (87.4%). Relatively, few providers 32 of 207 (15.5%) had previous experience with traceback. Among the individuals without experience in traceback, 84.0% thought there would be barriers to implementation; however, only 68.8% of individuals with previous traceback experience agreed (p =.04). Respondents in both groups thought that traceback would be valuable in their practice (82.6%, p =.22) and that they would feel comfortable discussing the concept (83.6%, p =.83), interpreting the results (72.2%, p =.24), and discussing the results with their patients (80.7%, p =.38). Patient interest and cost were seen as less of a barrier by those with experience with traceback testing. Recurrent themes obtained in open‐ended responses are also presented. Overall, providers believe that traceback would be a valuable tool in their practice. Individuals with previous experience identified less barriers with implementation of this testing, highlighting an area for future research and education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Women diagnosed with breast cancer (BC) at an older age are less likely to undergo genetic cancer risk assessment and genetic testing since the guidelines and referrals are biased toward earlier age at diagnosis. Thus, we determined the prevalence and type of pathogenic cancer predisposition variants among women with a history of BC diagnosed at the age of 65 years or older vs younger than 65 years. DESIGN: Prospective registration cohort. SETTING: The Clinical Cancer Genomics Community Research Network, including 40 community‐based clinics in the United States and 5 in Latin America. PARTICIPANTS: Women with BC and genetic testing results. MEASUREMENTS: Sociodemographic characteristics, clinical variables, and genetic profiles were compared between women aged 65 years and older and those younger than 65 years at BC diagnosis. RESULTS: Among 588 women diagnosed with BC and aged 65 years and older and 9412 diagnosed at younger than 65 years, BC‐associated pathogenic variants (PVs) were detected in 5.6% of those aged 65 years and older (n = 33) and 14.2% of those younger than 65 years (n = 1340) (P < .01). PVs in high‐risk genes (eg, BRCA1 and BRCA2) represented 81.1% of carriers among women aged 65 years and older (n = 27) and 93.1% of those younger than 65 years (n = 1248) (P = .01). BRCA2 PVs represented 42.4% of high‐risk gene findings for those aged 65 years and older, whereas BRCA1 PVs were most common among carriers younger than 65 years (49.7%). PVs (n = 7) in moderate‐risk genes represented 21.2% for carriers aged 65 years and older and 7.3% of those younger than 65 years (n = 98; P < .01). CHEK2 PVs were the most common moderate‐risk gene finding in both groups. CONCLUSION: Clinically actionable BC susceptibility PVs, particularly in BRCA2 and CHEK2, were relatively prevalent among older women undergoing genetic testing. The significant burden of PVs for older women with BC provides a critical reminder to recognize the full spectrum of eligibility and provide genetic testing for older women, rather than exclusion based on chronological age alone. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:884–888, 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In germline genetic testing, variants from understudied ancestries have been disproportionately classified as being of uncertain significance. We hypothesized that the rate of variant reclassification likewise differs by ancestry. Methods Nonbenign variants in actionable genes were collected from consenting subjects undergoing genetic testing at two Southern California sites from September 1996 through December 2016. Variant reclassifications were recorded as they were received, until February 2017 or reclassification to benign. Excluding duplicate variants (same ancestry, laboratory, classification), generalized linear models for the hereditary breast cancer genes (BRCA1/2) and other variants investigated whether rate of reclassification differed for seven categories of ancestry compared with non-Hispanic European. Models took into account laboratory, year, gene, sex, and current classification (handled as a time-dependent covariate) and were adjusted for multiple hypothesis testing. Results Among 1483 nonbenign variants, 693 (46.7%) involved BRCA1/2. Overall, 268 (18.1%) variants were reclassified at least once. Few (9.7%) reclassified variants underwent a net upgrade in pathogenicity. For BRCA1/2 variants, reclassification rates varied by ancestry and increased over time, more steeply for ancestries with lower initial rates (African, Ashkenazi, Chinese) than for ancestries whose initial rates were high (Middle Eastern) or similar to non-Hispanic European (non-Chinese Asian, Native American, Hispanic). In contrast, reclassification rates of non- BRCA1/2 variants did not vary over time but were elevated for most minority ancestries except non-Chinese Asian and Native American. Conclusions For nonbenign variants in cancer-related genes, the rates at which reclassifications are issued vary by ancestry in ways that differ between BRCA1/2 and other genes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies are driving a shift from single-gene to multigene panel testing for clinical genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA). This study explored perceptions, experiences, and challenges with NGS testing for GCRA among U.S. community-based clinicians. Methods: Surveys delivered at initial and 8-month time points, and 12-month tracking of cases presented in a multidisciplinary web-based case conference series, were conducted with GCRA providers who participated in a 235-member nationwide community of practice. Results: The proportion of respondents ordering panel tests rose from 29% at initial survey (27/94) to 44% (46/107) within 8 months. Respondents reported significantly less confidence about interpreting and counseling about NGS compared with single-gene test results ( p < 0.0001 for all comparisons). The most cited reasons for not ordering NGS tests included concerns about clinical utility, interpreting and communicating results, and lack of knowledge/skills. Multigene panels were used in 204/668 cases presented during 2013, yielding 37 (18%) deleterious (7% in low/moderate-penetrance genes), 88 (43%) with ≥1 variant of uncertain significance, 77 (38%) uninformative negative, and 2 (1%) inconclusive results. Conclusions: Despite concerns about utility and ability to interpret/counsel about NGS results, a rapidly increasing uptake of NGS testing among community clinicians was documented. Challenges identified in case discussions point to the need for ongoing education, practice-based support, and opportunities to partner in research that contributes to characterization of lesser known genes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Multigene panels can be a cost- and time-effective alternative to sequentially testing multiple genes, especially with a mixed family cancer phenotype. However, moving beyond our single-gene testing paradigm has unveiled many new challenges to the clinician. The purpose of this article is to familiarize the reader with some of the challenges, as well as potential opportunities, of expanded hereditary cancer panel testing. Methods: We include results from 348 commercial multigene panel tests ordered from January 1, 2014, through October 1, 2014, by clinicians associated with the City of Hope's Clinical Cancer Genetics Community of Practice. We also discuss specific challenging cases that arose during this period involving abnormalities in the genes: CDH1, TP53, PMS2, PALB2, CHEK2, NBN, and RAD51C. Results: If historically high risk genes only were included in the panels (BRCA1, BRCA2, MSH6, PMS2, TP53, APC, CDH1), the results would have been positive only 6.2% of the time, instead of 17%. Results returned with variants of uncertain significance (VUS) 42% of the time. Conclusion: These figures and cases stress the importance of adequate pre-test counseling in anticipation of higher percentages of positive, VUS, unexpected, and ambiguous test results. Test result ambiguity can be limited by the use of phenotype-specific panels; if found, multiple resources (the literature, reference laboratory, colleagues, national experts, and research efforts) can be accessed to better clarify counseling and management for the patient and family. For pathogenic variants in low and moderate risk genes, empiric risk modeling based on the patient's personal and family history of cancer may supersede gene-specific risk. Commercial laboratory and patient contributions to public databases and research efforts will be needed to better classify variants and reduce clinical ambiguity of multigene panels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific and technologic advances are revolutionizing our approach to genetic cancer risk assessment, cancer screening and prevention, and targeted therapy, fulfilling the promise of personalized medicine. In this monograph, we review the evolution of scientific discovery in cancer genetics and genomics, and describe current approaches, benefits, and barriers to the translation of this information to the practice of preventive medicine. Summaries of known hereditary cancer syndromes and highly penetrant genes are provided and contrasted with recently discovered genomic variants associated with modest increases in cancer risk. We describe the scope of knowledge, tools, and expertise required for the translation of complex genetic and genomic test information into clinical practice. The challenges of genomic counseling include the need for genetics and genomics professional education and multidisciplinary team training, the need for evidence-based information regarding the clinical utility of testing for genomic variants, the potential dangers posed by premature marketing of first-generation genomic profiles, and the need for new clinical models to improve access to and responsible communication of complex disease risk information. We conclude that given the experiences and lessons learned in the genetics era, the multidisciplinary model of genetic cancer risk assessment and management will serve as a solid foundation to support the integration of personalized genomic information into the practice of cancer medicine. CA Cancer J Clin 2011. © 2011 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the highlights of the symposium "Future Directions in Cancer Prevention and Control: Workforce Implications for Training, Practice and Policy," which was held on October 17-18, 2009 at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center of the University of Texas. The event featured brief words from the National Cancer Institute, American Cancer Society and American Society for Preventive Oncology. In the group Implementing Cancer Prevention into Clinical Practice, there was a common agreement that there is no well coordination in cancer education.

The article presents a study which aimed to identify rearrangements in the BRCA genes in a cohort of high-risk patients of predominantly Mexican ancestry. Materials and methods used in the study are discussed including sample, large rearrangement screening and characterization of RNA splicing and lost functional domains. The study found that sequenced cDNA showed that the predominant mRNA species was a direct splice of exons 8 to 13, and is predicted to result in an in-frame stop codon.

Objective: To prepare oncology, genetics and molecular medicine professionals for basic, translational and epidemiological cancer genetics research through advanced training in a novel specialized cancer genetics career development program (CGCDP).Methods: Established in 2001, the City of Hope CGCDP is the only program in the NCI R25T portfolio focused on interdisciplinary training of oncologists and geneticists as cancer genetics and cancer prevention research program leaders. Program infrastructure, curriculum, recruitment strategies, implementation, evaluation and outcome are described.Results: During the initial four-year period, twelve highly qualified health care professionals were recruited for cancer genetics academic, experiential, and research training. All trainees presented abstracts, published peer-reviewed journal articles, and/or were awarded cancer genetics research grants. Most are now in academic/research venues, following a cancer genetics research career trajectory.Conclusion: The CGCDP is an NIH-funded program that has successfully trained doctoral and mid-level professionals in cancer genetics research. Program graduates are addressing the burden of cancer by translating cancer genetics investigations into individual risk assessment tools and effective cancer screening and prevention interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In germline genetic testing, variants from understudied ancestries have been disproportionately classified as being of uncertain significance. We hypothesized that the rate of variant reclassification likewise differs by ancestry.Methods: Nonbenign variants in actionable genes were collected from consenting subjects undergoing genetic testing at two Southern California sites from September 1996 through December 2016. Variant reclassifications were recorded as they were received, until February 2017 or reclassification to benign. Excluding duplicate variants (same ancestry, laboratory, classification), generalized linear models for the hereditary breast cancer genes (BRCA1/2) and other variants investigated whether rate of reclassification differed for seven categories of ancestry compared with non-Hispanic European. Models took into account laboratory, year, gene, sex, and current classification (handled as a time-dependent covariate) and were adjusted for multiple hypothesis testing.Results: Among 1483 nonbenign variants, 693 (46.7%) involved BRCA1/2. Overall, 268 (18.1%) variants were reclassified at least once. Few (9.7%) reclassified variants underwent a net upgrade in pathogenicity. For BRCA1/2 variants, reclassification rates varied by ancestry and increased over time, more steeply for ancestries with lower initial rates (African, Ashkenazi, Chinese) than for ancestries whose initial rates were high (Middle Eastern) or similar to non-Hispanic European (non-Chinese Asian, Native American, Hispanic). In contrast, reclassification rates of non-BRCA1/2 variants did not vary over time but were elevated for most minority ancestries except non-Chinese Asian and Native American.Conclusions: For nonbenign variants in cancer-related genes, the rates at which reclassifications are issued vary by ancestry in ways that differ between BRCA1/2 and other genes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As demand for genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA) continues to increase, so does the sense of urgency to scale up efforts to triage patients, facilitate informed consent, and order genetic testing for cancer risk. The National Society of Genetic Counselors outlines the elements of informed consent that should be addressed in a GCRA session. While this practice resource aims to improve health equity, research on how well the elements of informed consent are implemented in practice is lacking. This retrospective and prospective mixed-methods study assessed how adequately the elements of informed consent are addressed during pre-test GCRA among 307 community clinicians (CC) and 129 cancer genetic counselors (GC), and barriers they face to addressing these elements. Results revealed that more than 90% of both cohorts consistently addressed components of at least 5 of the 10 elements of informed consent during a pre-test consultation. Technical aspects and accuracy of the test and utilization of test results were the most similarly addressed elements. Notably, GCs more often review the purpose of the test and who to test, general information about the gene(s), and economic considerations whereas CCs more often review alternatives to testing. Both cohorts reported psychosocial aspects of the informed consent process as the least adequately addressed element. Time constraints and patient-related concerns were most often cited by both cohorts as barriers to optimal facilitation of informed consent. Additional barriers reported by CCs included provider lack of awareness, experience, or education, and availability of resources and institutional support. Findings from this study may contribute to the development of alternative delivery models that incorporate supplementary educational tools to enhance patient understanding about the utility of genetic testing, while helping to mitigate the barrier of time constraints. Equally important is the use of this information to develop continuing education tools for providers., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Genetic Counseling published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of National Society of Genetic Counselors.)

Background: In germline genetic testing, variants from understudied ancestries have been disproportionately classified as being of uncertain significance. We hypothesized that the rate of variant reclassification likewise differs by ancestry., Methods: Nonbenign variants in actionable genes were collected from consenting subjects undergoing genetic testing at two Southern California sites from September 1996 through December 2016. Variant reclassifications were recorded as they were received, until February 2017 or reclassification to benign. Excluding duplicate variants (same ancestry, laboratory, classification), generalized linear models for the hereditary breast cancer genes (BRCA1/2) and other variants investigated whether rate of reclassification differed for seven categories of ancestry compared with non-Hispanic European. Models took into account laboratory, year, gene, sex, and current classification (handled as a time-dependent covariate) and were adjusted for multiple hypothesis testing., Results: Among 1483 nonbenign variants, 693 (46.7%) involved BRCA1/2. Overall, 268 (18.1%) variants were reclassified at least once. Few (9.7%) reclassified variants underwent a net upgrade in pathogenicity. For BRCA1/2 variants, reclassification rates varied by ancestry and increased over time, more steeply for ancestries with lower initial rates (African, Ashkenazi, Chinese) than for ancestries whose initial rates were high (Middle Eastern) or similar to non-Hispanic European (non-Chinese Asian, Native American, Hispanic). In contrast, reclassification rates of non-BRCA1/2 variants did not vary over time but were elevated for most minority ancestries except non-Chinese Asian and Native American., Conclusions: For nonbenign variants in cancer-related genes, the rates at which reclassifications are issued vary by ancestry in ways that differ between BRCA1/2 and other genes.

The prevalence and spectrum of germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 have been reported in single populations, with the majority of reports focused on White in Europe and North America. The Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) has assembled data on 18,435 families with BRCA1 mutations and 11,351 families with BRCA2 mutations ascertained from 69 centers in 49 countries on six continents. This study comprehensively describes the characteristics of the 1,650 unique BRCA1 and 1,731 unique BRCA2 deleterious (disease-associated) mutations identified in the CIMBA database. We observed substantial variation in mutation type and frequency by geographical region and race/ethnicity. In addition to known founder mutations, mutations of relatively high frequency were identified in specific racial/ethnic or geographic groups that may reflect founder mutations and which could be used in targeted (panel) first pass genotyping for specific populations. Knowledge of the population-specific mutational spectrum in BRCA1 and BRCA2 could inform efficient strategies for genetic testing and may justify a more broad-based oncogenetic testing in some populations., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Most common breast cancer susceptibility variants have been identified through genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of predominantly estrogen receptor (ER)-positive disease. We conducted a GWAS using 21,468 ER-negative cases and 100,594 controls combined with 18,908 BRCA1 mutation carriers (9,414 with breast cancer), all of European origin. We identified independent associations at P < 5 × 10 -8 with ten variants at nine new loci. At P < 0.05, we replicated associations with 10 of 11 variants previously reported in ER-negative disease or BRCA1 mutation carrier GWAS and observed consistent associations with ER-negative disease for 105 susceptibility variants identified by other studies. These 125 variants explain approximately 16% of the familial risk of this breast cancer subtype. There was high genetic correlation (0.72) between risk of ER-negative breast cancer and breast cancer risk for BRCA1 mutation carriers. These findings may lead to improved risk prediction and inform further fine-mapping and functional work to better understand the biological basis of ER-negative breast cancer.

Background: BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers are at substantially increased risk for developing breast and ovarian cancer. The incomplete penetrance coupled with the variable age at diagnosis in carriers of the same mutation suggests the existence of genetic and nongenetic modifying factors. In this study, we evaluated the putative role of variants in many candidate modifier genes., Methods: Genotyping data from 15,252 BRCA1 and 8,211 BRCA2 mutation carriers, for known variants (n = 3,248) located within or around 445 candidate genes, were available through the iCOGS custom-designed array. Breast and ovarian cancer association analysis was performed within a retrospective cohort approach., Results: The observed P values of association ranged between 0.005 and 1.000. None of the variants was significantly associated with breast or ovarian cancer risk in either BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers, after multiple testing adjustments., Conclusion: There is little evidence that any of the evaluated candidate variants act as modifiers of breast and/or ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers., Impact: Genome-wide association studies have been more successful at identifying genetic modifiers of BRCA1/2 penetrance than candidate gene studies., (©2014 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: To assess the impact of a multimodal interdisciplinary course on genetic cancer risk assessment and research collaboration for community-based clinicians. Clinicians are increasingly requested to conduct genetic cancer risk assessment, but many are inadequately prepared to provide these services., Methods: A prospective analysis of 131 participants (48 physicians, 41 advanced-practice nurses, and 42 genetic counselors) from community settings across the United States. The course was delivered in three phases: distance didactic learning, face-to-face training, and 12 months of web-based professional development activities to support integration of skills into practice. Cancer genetics knowledge, skills, professional self-efficacy, and practice changes were measured at baseline, immediate, and 14 months postcourse., Results: Knowledge, skills, and self-efficacy scores were significantly different between practice disciplines; however, postscores increased significantly overall and for each discipline (P < 0.001). Fourteen-month practice outcomes reflect significant increases in provision of genetic cancer risk assessment services (P = 0.018), dissemination of cancer prevention information (P = 0.005) and high-risk screening recommendations (P = 0.004) to patients, patient enrollment in research (P = 0.013), and educational outreach about genetic cancer risk assessment (P = 0.003)., Conclusions: Results support the efficacy of the multimodal course as a tool to develop a genetically literate workforce. Sustained alumni participation in web-based professional development activities has evolved into a distance-mediated community of practice in clinical cancer genetics, modeling the lifelong learning goals envisioned by leading continuing medical education stakeholders.

Rapidly evolving genetic and genomic technologies for genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA) are revolutionizing the approach to targeted therapy and cancer screening and prevention, heralding the era of personalized medicine. Although many academic medical centers provide GCRA services, most people receive their medical care in the community setting. However, few community clinicians have the knowledge or time needed to adequately select, apply, and interpret genetic/genomic tests. This article describes alternative approaches to the delivery of GCRA services, profiling the City of Hope Cancer Screening & Prevention Program Network (CSPPN) academic and community-based health center partnership as a model for the delivery of the highest-quality evidence-based GCRA services while promoting research participation in the community setting. Growth of the CSPPN was enabled by information technology, with videoconferencing for telemedicine and Web conferencing for remote participation in interdisciplinary genetics tumor boards. Grant support facilitated the establishment of an underserved minority outreach clinic in the regional County hospital. Innovative clinician education, technology, and collaboration are powerful tools to extend GCRA expertise from a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center, enabling diffusion of evidenced-base genetic/genomic information and best practice into the community setting.

Purpose: To describe nongenetics clinicians' perceptions and knowledge of cancer genetics and laws prohibiting genetic discrimination, attitudes toward the use of cancer genetic testing, and referral practices., Methods: Invitations to participate were sent to a random stratified sample of California Medical Association members and to all members of California Association of Nurse Practitioners and California Latino Medical Association. Responders in active practice were eligible and completed a 47-item survey., Results: There were 1181 qualified participants (62% physicians). Although 96% viewed genetic testing as beneficial for their patients, 75% believed fear of genetic discrimination would cause patients to decline testing. More than 60% were not aware of federal or California laws prohibiting health insurance discrimination--concern about genetic discrimination was selected as a reason for nonreferral by 11%. A positive attitude toward genetic testing was the strongest predictor of referral (odds ratio: 3.55 [95% confidence interval: 2.24-5.63], P < 0.001) in stepwise logistic regression analyses. The higher the belief in genetic discrimination, the less likely a participant was to refer (odds ratio: 0.72 [95% confidence interval: 0.518-0.991], P < 0.05), whereas more knowledge of genetic discrimination law was associated with comfort recommending (odds ratio: 1.18 [95% confidence interval: 1.11-1.25], P < 0.001) and actual referral (odds ratio: 3.55 [95% confidence interval: 2.24-5.63], P < 0.001)., Conclusion: Concerns about genetic discrimination and knowledge deficits may be barriers to cancer genetics referrals. Clinician education may help promote access to cancer screening and prevention.

Purpose: Women with a BRCA1 mutation (BRCA1(mut)) need risk reduction options beyond mastectomy and oophorectomy. We evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of hormonal chemoprevention with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHA) with low-dose add-back steroids in BRCA1(mut) carriers., Experimental Design: The 12-month open label clinical trial used the GnRHA deslorelin, ultra-low-dose estradiol (E(2)), and replacement testosterone, administered via daily intranasal spray in premenopausal women with a BRCA1(mut), and intermittent oral medroxyprogesterone acetate. The end points included mammographic percent density, bone mineral density, endometrial hyperplasia, symptom inventory, and quality of life (Medical Outcomes SF-36 survey)., Results: Six of eight BRCA1(mut) women (mean age, 30.3 years; range, 25-36 years) completed the study. Mammographic percent density was significantly reduced at 12 months (median absolute mammographic percent density decrease, 8.3%; P = 0.043), representing a 29.2% median reduction in mammographic percent density. Bone mineral density remained within reference limits for all participants; there were no cases of atypical endometrial hyperplasia and menses resumed within a median of 67 days (range, 35-110 days) after last drug treatment day. The treatment was well tolerated; hypoestrogenic side effects were minimal and transient; and there were no significant changes in quality of life., Conclusions: The GnRHA deslorelin, with low-dose add-back steroids, was well tolerated and significantly decreased mammographic percent density in BRCA1(mut) carriers. This regimen may reduce breast cancer risk and improve the usefulness of mammographic surveillance by reducing density. This is the first demonstration, to our knowledge, of a direct reduction of mammographic densities in young BRCA1(mut) carriers.

Unlabelled: Approximately 12% of the U.S. population is Hispanic, with the majority residing in urban centers such as Los Angeles. The prevalence of BRCA mutations among high-risk Hispanic families is unknown., Methods: One hundred and ten unrelated probands of Hispanic origin, with a personal or family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer, presented for genetic cancer risk assessment, were enrolled in an Institutional Review Board-approved registry and underwent BRCA testing. Haplotype analyses were done if BRCA mutations were observed in two or more unrelated probands., Results: Mean age at diagnosis was 37 years (range = 23-59) for the 89 (81%) probands with invasive breast cancer. Overall, 34 (30.9%) had deleterious mutations (25 in BRCA1, 9 in BRCA2), 25 (22.7%) had one or more unclassified variants, and 51 (46.4%) had negative results. The mean pretest mutation probability using the Couch model, Myriad model, and BRCAPro was 19.6% (range = 4-77%). The combined average mutation probability was 32.8% for carriers, 15.5% for noncarriers, and 12.9% for variant carriers (P < 0.0001). The most common deleterious mutation was 185delAG (4 of 34, 11.8%). The Hispanic 185delAG carrier families share the same haplotype from D17s1320 through BRCA1, as do two reference Ashkenazi Jewish families. Haplotype analyses of additional recurrent BRCA1 mutations [IVS5+1G>A (n=2),S955X (n = 3), R1443X (n = 3), and 2552delC (n = 2)] also suggest founder effects, with four of six mutations seen almost exclusively in families with Latin American/Caribbean or Spanish ancestry., Conclusion: This is the largest study to date of high-risk Hispanic families in the United States. Six recurrent mutations accounted for 47% (16 of 34) of the deleterious mutations in this cohort. The BRCA1185delAG mutation was prevalent (3.6%) in this clinic-based cohort of predominantly Mexican descent, and shared the Ashkenazi Jewish founder haplotype.

Purpose: Genetic cancer risk assessment is an emerging interdisciplinary practice that requires knowledge of genetics and oncology and specialized patient and family counseling skills. There is a growing need for cancer risk assessment practitioners, but most clinicians have inadequate cross-disciplinary training. An interdisciplinary course was developed to promote practitioner-level competency in cancer risk assessment to community-based clinicians. METHODS Participants were competitively selected from a pool of board-certified/eligible genetic counseling, masters-trained advanced practice nursing and physician applicants. Preference was given to clinicians with strong institutional backing practicing in underserved regions. The Continuing Medical Education/Continuing Education Unit-accredited course included didactic lectures, workshops, counseling practicum, and case conferences. Pre- and postcourse knowledge tests measured cancer genetics knowledge. Six month and one-year postcourse practice outcome surveys measured the impact of the program on professional self-efficacy and continued professional development., Results/conclusions: Forty clinicians completed the course (23 genetic counselors, 14 nurses, and three physicians). There was a significant overall increase of 22.6% in postcourse knowledge scores (P < 0.001). Thirty-five (88%) completed prescribed practice development activities. Of 29 respondents to 1-year postcourse survey, 76% reported increased professional self-efficacy; 66% reported increase in number of patients seen, and virtually all indicated interest in additional training. Outcomes demonstrate the value and efficacy of interdisciplinary training in genetic cancer risk assessment targeted to motivated community-based clinicians. Courses such as this can help address the need for competent cancer risk assessment services in communities outside the academic health center.

Background: There is a gap in knowledge about hereditary cancer and genetic testing among primary care practitioners. Education is needed to enable identification and management of patients at high risk for cancer., Methods: A new cancer genetics curriculum was delivered through individual lectures and full-day conferences. Innovative marketing and conference organizational approaches were used to increase participation., Results: The curriculum has been delivered to 7,400 health care professionals with diverse educational backgrounds., Conclusion: Conventional formats were successfully used to implement this new curriculum. CME evaluations indicated satisfaction with the programs and a clear need for and continued interest in cancer genetics applications.