Dataset Information

Mutation Detection in Patients With Advanced Cancer by Universal Sequencing of Cancer-Related Genes in Tumor and Normal DNA vs Guideline-Based Germline Testing.

ABSTRACT: Importance:Guidelines for cancer genetic testing based on family history may miss clinically actionable genetic changes with established implications for cancer screening or prevention. Objective:To determine the proportion and potential clinical implications of inherited variants detected using simultaneous sequencing of the tumor and normal tissue ("tumor-normal sequencing") compared with genetic test results based on current guidelines. Design, Setting, and Participants:From January 2014 until May 2016 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 10?336 patients consented to tumor DNA sequencing. Since May 2015, 1040 of these patients with advanced cancer were referred by their oncologists for germline analysis of 76 cancer predisposition genes. Patients with clinically actionable inherited mutations whose genetic test results would not have been predicted by published decision rules were identified. Follow-up for potential clinical implications of mutation detection was through May 2017. Exposure:Tumor and germline sequencing compared with the predicted yield of targeted germline sequencing based on clinical guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures:Proportion of clinically actionable germline mutations detected by universal tumor-normal sequencing that would not have been detected by guideline-directed testing. Results:Of 1040 patients, the median age was 58 years (interquartile range, 50.5-66 years), 65.3% were male, and 81.3% had stage IV disease at the time of genomic analysis, with prostate, renal, pancreatic, breast, and colon cancer as the most common diagnoses. Of the 1040 patients, 182 (17.5%; 95% CI, 15.3%-19.9%) had clinically actionable mutations conferring cancer susceptibility, including 149 with moderate- to high-penetrance mutations; 101 patients tested (9.7%; 95% CI, 8.1%-11.7%) would not have had these mutations detected using clinical guidelines, including 65 with moderate- to high-penetrance mutations. Frequency of inherited mutations was related to case mix, stage, and founder mutations. Germline findings led to discussion or initiation of change to targeted therapy in 38 patients tested (3.7%) and predictive testing in the families of 13 individuals (1.3%), including 6 for whom genetic evaluation would not have been initiated by guideline-based testing. Conclusions and Relevance:In this referral population with selected advanced cancers, universal sequencing of a broad panel of cancer-related genes in paired germline and tumor DNA samples was associated with increased detection of individuals with potentially clinically significant heritable mutations over the predicted yield of targeted germline testing based on current clinical guidelines. Knowledge of these additional mutations can help guide therapeutic and preventive interventions, but whether all of these interventions would improve outcomes for patients with cancer or their family members requires further study. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01775072.

SUBMITTER: Mandelker D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5611881 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mutation Detection in Patients With Advanced Cancer by Universal Sequencing of Cancer-Related Genes in Tumor and Normal DNA vs Guideline-Based Germline Testing.

Mandelker Diana D Zhang Liying L Kemel Yelena Y Stadler Zsofia K ZK Joseph Vijai V Zehir Ahmet A Pradhan Nisha N Arnold Angela A Walsh Michael F MF Li Yirong Y Balakrishnan Anoop R AR Syed Aijazuddin A Prasad Meera M Nafa Khedoudja K Carlo Maria I MI Cadoo Karen A KA Sheehan Meg M Fleischut Megan H MH Salo-Mullen Erin E Trottier Magan M Lipkin Steven M SM Lincoln Anne A Mukherjee Semanti S Ravichandran Vignesh V Cambria Roy R Galle Jesse J Abida Wassim W Arcila Marcia E ME Benayed Ryma R Shah Ronak R Yu Kenneth K Bajorin Dean F DF Coleman Jonathan A JA Leach Steven D SD Lowery Maeve A MA Garcia-Aguilar Julio J Kantoff Philip W PW Sawyers Charles L CL Dickler Maura N MN Saltz Leonard L Motzer Robert J RJ O'Reilly Eileen M EM Scher Howard I HI Baselga Jose J Klimstra David S DS Solit David B DB Hyman David M DM Berger Michael F MF Ladanyi Marc M Robson Mark E ME Offit Kenneth K

JAMA 20170901 9

<h4>Importance</h4>Guidelines for cancer genetic testing based on family history may miss clinically actionable genetic changes with established implications for cancer screening or prevention.<h4>Objective</h4>To determine the proportion and potential clinical implications of inherited variants detected using simultaneous sequencing of the tumor and normal tissue ("tumor-normal sequencing") compared with genetic test results based on current guidelines.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4> ...[more]

PMID: 28873162

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceHereditary factors play a key role in the risk of developing several cancers. Identification of a germline predisposition can have important implications for treatment decisions, risk-reducing interventions, cancer screening, and germline testing.ObjectiveTo examine the prevalence of pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) in patients with cancer using a universal testing approach compared with targeted testing based on clinical guidelines and the uptake of cascade family variant testing (FVT).Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective, multicenter cohort study assessed germline genetic alterations among patients with solid tumor cancer receiving care at Mayo Clinic cancer centers and a community practice between April 1, 2018, and March 31, 2020. Patients were not selected based on cancer type, disease stage, family history of cancer, ethnicity, or age.ExposuresGermline sequencing using a greater than 80-gene next-generation sequencing platform.Main outcomes and measuresProportion of PGVs detected with a universal strategy compared with a guideline-directed approach and uptake of cascade FVT in families.ResultsA total of 2984 patients (mean [SD] age, 61.4 [12.2] years; 1582 [53.0%] male) were studied. Pathogenic germline variants were found in 397 patients (13.3%), including 282 moderate- and high-penetrance cancer susceptibility genes. Variants of uncertain significance were found in 1415 patients (47.4%). A total of 192 patients (6.4%) had incremental clinically actionable findings that would not have been detected by phenotype or family history-based testing criteria. Of those with a high-penetrance PGV, 42 patients (28.2%) had modifications in their treatment based on the finding. Only younger age of diagnosis was associated with presence of PGV. Only 70 patients (17.6%) with PGVs had family members undergoing no-cost cascade FVT.Conclusions and relevanceThis prospective, multicenter cohort study found that universal multigene panel testing among patients with solid tumor cancer was associated with an increased detection of heritable variants over the predicted yield of targeted testing based on guidelines. Nearly 30% of patients with high-penetrance variants had modifications in their treatment. Uptake of cascade FVT was low despite being offered at no cost.

Project description:PurposeTo provide recommendations on genetic and tumor testing for women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer based on available evidence and expert consensus.MethodsA literature search and prospectively defined study selection criteria sought systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and comparative observational studies published from 2007 through 2019. Guideline recommendations were based on the review of the evidence.ResultsThe systematic review identified 19 eligible studies. The evidence consisted of systematic reviews of observational data, consensus guidelines, and RCTs.RecommendationsAll women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer should have germline genetic testing for BRCA1/2 and other ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. In women who do not carry a germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic BRCA1/2 variant, somatic tumor testing for BRCA1/2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants should be performed. Women with identified germline or somatic pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 genes should be offered treatments that are US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved in the upfront and the recurrent setting. Women diagnosed with clear cell, endometrioid, or mucinous ovarian cancer should be offered somatic tumor testing for mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR). Women with identified dMMR should be offered FDA-approved treatment based on these results. Genetic evaluations should be conducted in conjunction with health care providers familiar with the diagnosis and management of hereditary cancer. First- or second-degree blood relatives of a patient with ovarian cancer with a known germline pathogenic cancer susceptibility gene variant should be offered individualized genetic risk evaluation, counseling, and genetic testing. Clinical decision making should not be made based on a variant of uncertain significance. Women with epithelial ovarian cancer should have testing at the time of diagnosis.

Project description:Objective:To compare the efficacy of platinum- and non-platinum-based regimens as first-line treatment for advanced triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and analyze the relationship between their efficacy and BRCA gene status. Methods:Retrospectively analyze clinical data of 220 patients diagnosed pathologically with advanced TNBC and treated at the Department of Breast Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital from 2013 to 2018 and evaluate the efficacy of chemotherapy. A total of 114 patients had BRCA1/2 gene tested by next generation sequencing (NGS) using peripheral blood, and we analyzed the correlation between their efficacy and BRCA1/2 gene status. Results:Non-platinum-based chemotherapy (NPCT) was administered to 129 and platinum-based chemotherapy (PBCT) to 91 study patients. The clinical benefit rate (CBR) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were not statistically different between NPCT and PBCT groups. The median overall survival (OS) was 30.0 and 22.5 months for PBCT and NPCT group, respectively [P=0.090, hazard ratios (HR)=0.703]. BRCA status was assessed in 114 patients, 14 of whom had deleterious germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA) mutations (seven in each group). In PBCT group, the CBR was 85.7% and 35.1% for patients with and without deleterious gBRCA mutations, respectively (P=0.039). The median PFS were 14.9 and 5.3 months and median OS were 26.5 and 15.5 months for patients with and without deleterious gBRCA mutations, respectively (P=0.001, P=0.161, respectively). Patients in PBCT group had significantly greater rates of grade 3-4 anemia (5.5%vs. 0%) and thrombocytopenia (8.8% vs. 0%), whereas palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (12.4% vs. 0%) and peripheral neuropathy (8.6% vs. 1.1%) occurred more frequently in NPCT group. Conclusions:Platinum-based regimens are more effective in patients with deleterious gBRCA mutations, but no difference in patients without BRCA gene mutations, so non-platinum is an option in patients without BRCA gene mutations considering the toxicity and side effect. And we recommend that patients with advanced TNBC should have BRCA gene test.

Project description:A key constraint in genomic testing in oncology is that matched normal specimens are not commonly obtained in clinical practice. Thus, while well-characterized genomic alterations do not require normal tissue for interpretation, a significant number of alterations will be unknown in whether they are germline or somatic, in the absence of a matched normal control. We introduce SGZ (somatic-germline-zygosity), a computational method for predicting somatic vs. germline origin and homozygous vs. heterozygous or sub-clonal state of variants identified from deep massively parallel sequencing (MPS) of cancer specimens. The method does not require a patient matched normal control, enabling broad application in clinical research. SGZ predicts the somatic vs. germline status of each alteration identified by modeling the alteration's allele frequency (AF), taking into account the tumor content, tumor ploidy, and the local copy number. Accuracy of the prediction depends on the depth of sequencing and copy number model fit, which are achieved in our clinical assay by sequencing to high depth (>500x) using MPS, covering 394 cancer-related genes and over 3,500 genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Calls are made using a statistic based on read depth and local variability of SNP AF. To validate the method, we first evaluated performance on samples from 30 lung and colon cancer patients, where we sequenced tumors and matched normal tissue. We examined predictions for 17 somatic hotspot mutations and 20 common germline SNPs in 20,182 clinical cancer specimens. To assess the impact of stromal admixture, we examined three cell lines, which were titrated with their matched normal to six levels (10-75%). Overall, predictions were made in 85% of cases, with 95-99% of variants predicted correctly, a significantly superior performance compared to a basic approach based on AF alone. We then applied the SGZ method to the COSMIC database of known somatic variants in cancer and found >50 that are in fact more likely to be germline.

Project description:ImportanceIn 2020, some health insurance plans updated their medical policy to cover germline genetic testing for all patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC). Guidelines for universal tumor screening via microsatellite instability and/or immunohistochemistry (MSI/IHC) for mismatch repair protein expression for patients with CRC have been in place since 2009.ObjectivesTo examine whether uptake of MSI/IHC screening and germline genetic testing in patients with CRC has improved under these policies and to identify actionable findings and management implications for patients referred for germline genetic testing.Design, setting, and participantsThe multicenter, retrospective cohort study comprised 2 analyses of patients 18 years or older who were diagnosed with CRC between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2020. The first analysis used an insurance claims data set to examine use of MSI/IHC screening and germline genetic testing for patients diagnosed with CRC between 2017 and 2020 and treated with systemic therapy. The second comprised patients with CRC who had germline genetic testing performed in 2020 that was billed under a universal testing policy.Main outcomes and measuresPatient demographic characteristics, clinical information, and use of MSI/IHC screening and germline genetic testing were analyzed.ResultsFor 9066 patients with newly diagnosed CRC (mean [SD] age, 64.2 [12.7] years; 4964 [54.8%] male), administrative claims data indicated that MSI/IHC was performed in 6645 eligible patients (73.3%) during the study period, with 2288 (25.2%) not receiving MSI/IHC despite being eligible for coverage. Analysis of a second cohort of 55 595 patients with CRC diagnosed in 2020 and covered by insurance found that only 1675 (3.0%) received germline genetic testing. In a subset of patients for whom germline genetic testing results were available, 1 in 6 patients had pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants, with most of these patients having variants with established clinical actionability.Conclusions and relevanceThis nationwide cohort study found suboptimal rates of MSI/IHC screening and germline genetic testing uptake, resulting in clinically actionable genetic data being unavailable to patients diagnosed with CRC, despite universal eligibility. Effective strategies are required to address barriers to implementation of evidence-based universal testing policies that support precision treatment and optimal care management for patients with CRC.

Project description:ImportanceAmong patients with esophagogastric cancers, only individuals who present with known features of heritable cancer syndromes are referred for genetic testing. Broader testing might identify additional patients with germline alterations.ObjectivesTo examine the prevalence of likely pathogenic or pathogenic (LP/P) germline alterations among patients with esophagogastric cancer and to assess associations between germline variant prevalence and demographic and clinicopathologic features.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study was performed at a tertiary referral cancer center from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2019, in 515 patients with esophagogastric cancer who consented to tumor and blood sequencing.Main outcomes and measuresPresence or absence of LP/P variants in up to 88 genes associated with cancer predisposition syndromes as identified by targeted sequencing (Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets).ResultsAmong 515 patients (median age, 59 years; range, 18-87 years; 368 [71.5%] male; 398 [77.3%] White), 243 (47.2%) had gastric cancer, 111 (21.6%) had gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer, and 161 (31.3%) had esophageal cancer. A total of 48 patients with gastric cancer (19.8%), 16 (14.4%) with GEJ cancer, and 17 (10.6%) with esophageal cancer had LP/P germline variants. The number of LP/P variants in high- and moderate-penetrance genes was significantly higher in patients with gastric cancer (29 [11.9%]; 95% CI, 8.1%-16.7%) vs patients with esophageal cancer (8 [5.0%]; 95% CI, 2.2%-9.6%; P = .03), and the difference was greater for high-penetrance germline alterations in patients with gastric cancer (25 [10.3%]; 95% CI, 6.8%-14.8%) vs in patients with esophageal cancer (3 [1.9%]; 95% CI, 0.38%-5.3%; P = .001). The most frequent high- and moderate-penetrance LP/P alterations were in BRCA1/2 (14 [2.7%]), ATM (11 [2.1%]), CDH1 (6 [1.2%]), and MSH2 (4 [0.8%]). Those with early-onset disease (≤50 years of age at diagnosis) were more likely to harbor an LP/P germline variant (29 [21.0%]; 95% CI, 14.5%-28.8%) vs those with late-onset disease (patients >50 years of age at diagnosis) (52 [13.8%]; 95% CI, 10.5%-17.7%; P = .046). ATM LP/P variants occurred in 6 patients (4.3%; 95% CI, 1.6%-9.1%) with early-onset esophagogastric cancer vs 5 (1.3%; 95% CI, 0.4%-3.1%; P = .08) of those with late-onset esophagogastric cancer.Conclusions and relevanceThese results suggest that pathogenic germline variants are enriched in gastric and early-onset esophagogastric cancer and that germline testing should be considered in these populations. The role of ATM alterations in esophagogastric cancer risk warrants further investigation.

Project description:ImportanceBoth germline genetic testing and tumor DNA sequencing are increasingly used in cancer care. The indications for testing and utility of these 2 tests differ, and guidelines recommend that germline analysis follow tumor sequencing in certain patients to determine whether particular variants are of somatic or germline origin. Broad clinical experience with such follow-up testing has not yet been thoroughly described.ObjectiveTo examine the yield and utility of germline testing following tumor DNA sequencing in a large, diverse patient population.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study examined germline testing through a laboratory supporting multiple academic and community clinics. Participants included 2023 patients with cancer who received germline testing and previously underwent tumor DNA sequencing. These patients received germline testing between January 5, 2015, and January 31, 2020, although most (81% of patients) received testing between January 2, 2018, and January 31, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresThe prevalence of pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) was calculated by gene, cancer type, and age at diagnosis. Potential actionability of these findings was determined based on current management guidelines, precision therapy labels, and clinical trial eligibility criteria. Patient records were reviewed to determine whether germline follow-up testing would have been recommended by current guidelines.ResultsAmong 2023 eligible patients, 1085 were female (53.6%), and the median age at cancer diagnosis was 56 (range, 0-92) years. Pathogenic germline variants were detected in 617 patients (30.5%; 95% CI, 28.5%-32.6%) and were prevalent across patient ages (1-85 years) and cancer types, including cancers known to be strongly associated with germline variance (eg, breast, colorectal) as well as others (eg, renal, lung, and bladder). Many patients (78%-82%) with PGVs met criteria for germline follow-up testing, and 8.1% of PGVs were missed by tumor sequencing. Among those with germline-positive findings, 69 patients (11.2%) had PGVs identified only after presenting with a second primary cancer that possibly could have been detected earlier or prevented given current gene-specific surveillance and risk-reduction recommendations.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this study suggest that germline analysis following tumor sequencing often produces findings that may impact patient care by influencing systemic therapy choices, surgical decisions, additional cancer screening, and genetic counseling in families. Current guidelines and tumor testing approaches appear to capture many, but not all, of these germline findings, reinforcing the utility of both expanded germline follow-up testing as well as germline analysis independent of tumor sequencing in appropriate patients.

Dataset Information

Mutation Detection in Patients With Advanced Cancer by Universal Sequencing of Cancer-Related Genes in Tumor and Normal DNA vs Guideline-Based Germline Testing.

Publications

Mutation Detection in Patients With Advanced Cancer by Universal Sequencing of Cancer-Related Genes in Tumor and Normal DNA vs Guideline-Based Germline Testing.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets