Clinical Impact of Pathogenic Variants in DNA Damage Repair Genes beyond BRCA1 and BRCA2 in Breast and Ovarian Cancer Patients

Simple Summary The clinical utility of positive findings in DNA damage-repair (DDR) genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 for the treatment of patients with breast or ovarian cancer is well established. However, multigene panel genetic testing for patients with breast and ovarian cancer now commonly includes DDR genes in addition to BRCA1 and BRCA2, a number of which are considered moderate or low-risk genes. This study aimed to describe the clinical utility of positive results from genetic testing when the findings were in one of these other DDR genes. In a group of 101 women with positive findings in a cancer gene other than BRCA1 or BRCA2 (often in a DDR gene), nearly three-fifths (58%) had a clinical recommendation made based on their positive genetic test result and two-thirds (65%) had the clinician make recommendations for family members that may be at risk. This real-world data provides evidence that positive findings from genetic testing for moderate and low-risk genes, including DDR genes, can have clinical utility and can impact a patient’s clinical management. Abstract Consensus guidelines for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer include management recommendations for pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants in ATM, CHEK2, PALB2, and other DNA damage repair (DDR) genes beyond BRCA1 or BRCA2. We report on clinical management decisions across three academic medical centers resulting from P/LP findings in DDR genes in breast/ovarian cancer patients. Among 2184 patients, 156 (7.1%) carried a P/LP variant in a DDR gene. Clinical follow-up information was available for 101/156 (64.7%) patients. Genetic test result-based management recommendations were made for 57.8% (n = 59) of patients and for 64.7% (n = 66) of patients’ family members. Most recommendations were made for moderate-to-high risk genes and were consistent with guidelines. Sixty-six percent of patients (n = 39/59) implemented recommendations. This study suggests that P/LP variants in DDR genes beyond BRCA1 and BRCA2 can change clinical management recommendations for patients and their family members, facilitate identification of new at-risk carriers, and impact treatment decisions. Additional efforts are needed to improve the implementation rates of genetic-testing-based management recommendations for patients and their family members.

[1]  James M. Hodge,et al.  A Population-Based Study of Genes Previously Implicated in Breast Cancer. , 2021, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  B. Karlan,et al.  Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. , 2021, Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN.

[3]  Jaana M. Hartikainen,et al.  Breast Cancer Risk Genes - Association Analysis in More than 113,000 Women. , 2021, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  K. Savage,et al.  Homologous recombination deficiency in breast cancer: Implications for risk, cancer development, and therapy , 2020, Genes, chromosomes & cancer.

[5]  S. Seal,et al.  One in seven pathogenic variants can be challenging to detect by NGS: an analysis of 450,000 patients with implications for clinical sensitivity and genetic test implementation , 2020, Genetics in Medicine.

[6]  Dustin N. Hartzel,et al.  Healthcare Utilization and Costs after Receiving a Positive BRCA1/2 Result from a Genomic Screening Program , 2020, Journal of personalized medicine.

[7]  F. Couch,et al.  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 , 2019, Genetics in Medicine.

[8]  Judy C. Boughey,et al.  Consensus Guidelines on Genetic` Testing for Hereditary Breast Cancer from the American Society of Breast Surgeons , 2019, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[9]  Aung Ko Win,et al.  Cancer risks by gene, age, and gender in 6350 carriers of pathogenic mismatch repair variants: findings from the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database , 2019, Genetics in Medicine.

[10]  Angela Mariotto,et al.  Genetic Testing and Results in a Population-Based Cohort of Breast Cancer Patients and Ovarian Cancer Patients. , 2019, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  F. Couch,et al.  Genetic Testing and Clinical Management Practices for Variants in Non-BRCA1/2 Breast (and Breast/Ovarian) Cancer Susceptibility Genes: An International Survey by the Evidence-Based Network for the Interpretation of Germline Mutant Alleles (ENIGMA) Clinical Working Group. , 2018, JCO precision oncology.

[12]  Joshua S. Paul,et al.  Prevalence and properties of intragenic copy-number variation in Mendelian disease genes , 2018, Genetics in Medicine.

[13]  Gretchen M. Williams,et al.  DICER1 and Associated Conditions: Identification of At-risk Individuals and Recommended Surveillance Strategies , 2018, Clinical Cancer Research.

[14]  Robert Huether,et al.  Associations Between Cancer Predisposition Testing Panel Genes and Breast Cancer , 2017, JAMA oncology.

[15]  Alexander Gutin,et al.  Breast and Ovarian Cancer Penetrance Estimates Derived From Germline Multiple-Gene Sequencing Results in Women. , 2017, JCO precision oncology.

[16]  Keith Nykamp,et al.  Sherloc: a comprehensive refinement of the ACMG–AMP variant classification criteria , 2017, Genetics in Medicine.

[17]  E. Paskett,et al.  Decision making for breast cancer prevention among women at elevated risk , 2017, Breast Cancer Research.

[18]  S. Verma,et al.  An exploratory study of patients' views about being at high-risk for breast cancer and risk management beliefs and intentions, before and after risk counselling: Preliminary evidence of the influence of beliefs on post-counselling prevention intentions. , 2017, Patient education and counseling.

[19]  John Kidd,et al.  Frequency of Germline Mutations in 25 Cancer Susceptibility Genes in a Sequential Series of Patients With Breast Cancer. , 2016, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[20]  Mark E. Robson,et al.  Counselling framework for moderate-penetrance cancer-susceptibility mutations , 2016, Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology.

[21]  Yuya Kobayashi,et al.  A Systematic Comparison of Traditional and Multigene Panel Testing for Hereditary Breast and 77 78 79 80 81 82 Ovarian Cancer Genes in More Than 1000 Patients , 2015 .

[22]  J. Toro,et al.  Hereditary Leiomyomatosis and Renal Cell Cancer , 2020, Handbook of Tumor Syndromes.

[23]  Nazneen Rahman,et al.  Gene-panel sequencing and the prediction of breast-cancer risk. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  H. Rehm,et al.  Standards and Guidelines for the Interpretation of Sequence Variants: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology , 2015, Genetics in Medicine.

[25]  A. Gimenez-Roqueplo,et al.  Paraganglioma and phaeochromocytoma: from genetics to personalized medicine , 2015, Nature Reviews Endocrinology.

[26]  Karla Bowles,et al.  Frequency of mutations in individuals with breast cancer referred for BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing using next‐generation sequencing with a 25‐gene panel , 2015, Cancer.

[27]  W. Linehan,et al.  Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer (HLRCC): renal cancer risk, surveillance and treatment , 2014, Familial Cancer.

[28]  W. Foulkes,et al.  Pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma syndromes: genetics and management update. , 2013, Current oncology.

[29]  Rosalind Eeles,et al.  Association of risk-reducing surgery in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with cancer risk and mortality. , 2010, JAMA.

[30]  Ellen Warner,et al.  Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination , 2004, JAMA.

[31]  R. Winqvist,et al.  Mutation screening of Mre11 complex genes: indication of RAD50 involvement in breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility , 2003, Journal of medical genetics.