Genetic testing women with newly diagnosed breast cancer: What criteria are the most predictive of a positive test?


Journal

Cancer medicine
ISSN: 2045-7634
Titre abrégé: Cancer Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101595310

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
03 2023
Historique:
revised: 14 11 2022
received: 28 06 2022
accepted: 25 11 2022
medline: 5 4 2023
pubmed: 23 12 2022
entrez: 22 12 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Knowledge of pathogenic variants in cancer-predisposing genes is important when making breast cancer treatment decisions, but genetic testing is not universal and criteria must be met to qualify for genetic testing. The objective of this study was to evaluate the pathogenic variant yield for nine cancer predisposition genes by testing criteria, singly and in combination. Women diagnosed with breast cancer between June 2013 and May 2018 were recruited from four centers in Toronto, Canada. Participants completed a demographics and family history questionnaire and clinical characteristics were collected from medical charts. Genetic testing was done for BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, BRIP1, RAD51D, RECQL, and TP53. Pathogenic variant frequencies were calculated according to five criteria (age ≤ 50, triple-negative breast cancer, family history, bilateral breast cancer, or Jewish ethnicity). Of the 1006 women studied, 100 women (9.9%) were found to have a pathogenic variant in one of the nine genes tested. The highest prevalence of pathogenic variants was found in women with triple-negative breast cancer (23%). Of the 100 pathogenic variants detected, 78 were detected in women diagnosed at age 50 or less. A total of 96% of the mutations were identified with three criteria (age of diagnosis, family history, and triple-negative status). Genetic testing criteria for women with breast cancer should include women with triple-negative breast cancer, regardless of age. All women aged 50 years or below at time of breast cancer diagnosis should be offered genetic testing.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Knowledge of pathogenic variants in cancer-predisposing genes is important when making breast cancer treatment decisions, but genetic testing is not universal and criteria must be met to qualify for genetic testing. The objective of this study was to evaluate the pathogenic variant yield for nine cancer predisposition genes by testing criteria, singly and in combination.
METHODS
Women diagnosed with breast cancer between June 2013 and May 2018 were recruited from four centers in Toronto, Canada. Participants completed a demographics and family history questionnaire and clinical characteristics were collected from medical charts. Genetic testing was done for BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, BRIP1, RAD51D, RECQL, and TP53. Pathogenic variant frequencies were calculated according to five criteria (age ≤ 50, triple-negative breast cancer, family history, bilateral breast cancer, or Jewish ethnicity).
RESULTS
Of the 1006 women studied, 100 women (9.9%) were found to have a pathogenic variant in one of the nine genes tested. The highest prevalence of pathogenic variants was found in women with triple-negative breast cancer (23%). Of the 100 pathogenic variants detected, 78 were detected in women diagnosed at age 50 or less. A total of 96% of the mutations were identified with three criteria (age of diagnosis, family history, and triple-negative status).
CONCLUSIONS
Genetic testing criteria for women with breast cancer should include women with triple-negative breast cancer, regardless of age. All women aged 50 years or below at time of breast cancer diagnosis should be offered genetic testing.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36544278
doi: 10.1002/cam4.5515
pmc: PMC10067031
doi:

Substances chimiques

RecQ Helicases EC 3.6.4.12

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

7580-7587

Informations de copyright

© 2022 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Références

Tung N, Lin NU, Kidd J, et al. Frequency of germline pathogenic variants in 25 cancer susceptibility genes in a sequential series of patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(13):1460-1468. doi:10.1200/JCO.2015.65.0747
Metcalfe K, Gershman S, Ghadirian P, et al. Contralateral mastectomy and survival after breast cancer in carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants: retrospective analysis. BMJ. 2014;348:g226. doi:10.1136/bmj.g226
Metcalfe K, Lynch HT, Foulkes WD, et al. Effect of oophorectomy on survival after breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1(3):306-313. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.0658
Finch AP, Lubinski J, Moller P, et al. Impact of oophorectomy on cancer incidence and mortality in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variant. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15):1547-1553. doi:10.1200/JCO.2013.53.2820
Tutt ANJ, Garber JE, Kaufman B, et al. Adjuvant Olaparib for patients with BRCA1- or BRCA2-mutated breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(25):2394-2405. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2105215
Manahan ER, Kuerer HM, Sebastian M, et al. Consensus guidelines on genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer from the American Society of Breast Surgeons. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(10):3025-3031. doi:10.1245/s10434-019-07549-8
O'Leary E, Iacoboni D, Holle J, et al. Expanded gene panel use for women with breast cancer: identification and intervention beyond breast cancer risk. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(10):3060-3066. doi:10.1245/s10434-017-5963-7
Beitsch PD, Whitworth PW, Hughes K, et al. Underdiagnosis of hereditary breast cancer: are genetic testing guidelines a tool or an obstacle? J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(6):453-460. doi:10.1200/JCO.18.01631
Metcalfe KA, Eisen A, Poll A, et al. Rapid genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants at the time of breast cancer diagnosis: an observational study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28(4):2219-2226. doi:10.1245/s10434-020-09160-8
Mandelker D, Zhang L, Kemel Y, et al. Pathogenic variant detection in patients with advanced cancer by universal sequencing of cancer-related genes in tumor and Normal DNA vs guideline-based germline testing. JAMA. 2017;318(9):825-835. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.11137
National Comprehensive Cancer N. Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreaticc.
Boddicker NJ, Hu C, Weitzel JN, et al. Risk of late-onset breast cancer in genetically predisposed women. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(31):3430-3440. doi:10.1200/JCO.21.00531
Chavarri-Guerra Y, Marcum CA, Hendricks CB, et al. Breast cancer associated pathogenic variants among women 61years and older with triple negative breast cancer. J Geriatr Oncol. 2021;12(5):749-751. doi:10.1016/j.jgo.2020.11.008
NCC Network. NCCN Guidelines Versihigh risk for familial ovarian cancer, but noton 1.2023; Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic 2022.
Yadav S, Hu C, Hart SN, et al. Evaluation of germline genetic testing criteria in a hospital-based series of women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(13):1409-1418. doi:10.1200/JCO.19.02190
Desai NV, Yadav S, Batalini F, Couch FJ, Tung NM. Germline genetic testing in breast cancer: rationale for the testing of all women diagnosed by the age of 60 years and for risk-based testing of those older than 60 years. Cancer. 2021;127(6):828-833. doi:10.1002/cncr.33305
Manchanda R, Loggenberg K, Sanderson S, et al. Population testing for cancer predisposing BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations in the Ashkenazi-Jewish community: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2015;107(1):379. doi:10.1093/jnci/dju379
Seal S, Thompson D, Renwick A, et al. Truncating mutations in the Fanconi anemia J gene BRIP1 are low-penetrance breast cancer susceptibility alleles. Research support, non-U.S. Gov't research support, U.S. Gov't, non-P.H.S. Nature Genetics. 2006;38(11):1239-1241. doi:10.1038/ng1902
Weber-Lassalle N, Hauke J, Ramser J, et al. BRIP1 loss-of-function mutations confer high risk for familial ovarian cancer, but not familial breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2018;20(1):7. doi:10.1186/s13058-018-0935-9
Cybulski C, Carrot-Zhang J, Kluzniak W, et al. Germline RECQL mutations are associated with breast cancer susceptibility. Nat Genet. 2015;47(6):643-646. doi:10.1038/ng.3284
Tervasmaki A, Mantere T, Hartikainen JM, et al. Rare missense mutations in RECQL and POLG associate with inherited predisposition to breast cancer. Int J Cancer. 2018;142(11):2286-2292. doi:10.1002/ijc.31259
Palmer JR, Polley EC, Hu C, et al. Contribution of germline predisposition gene mutations to breast cancer risk in African American women. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2020;112(12):1213-1221. doi:10.1093/jnci/djaa040
Li N, Rowley SM, Goode DL, et al. Mutations in RECQL are not associated with breast cancer risk in an Australian population. Nat Genet. 2018;50(10):1346-1348. doi:10.1038/s41588-018-0206-9
Hu C, Hart SN, Gnanaolivu R, et al. A population-based study of genes previously implicated in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(5):440-451. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2005936

Auteurs

Kelly A Metcalfe (KA)

Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Women's College Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.

Steven A Narod (SA)

Women's College Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.

Andrea Eisen (A)

Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.

Aletta Poll (A)

Women's College Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.

Neda Zamani (N)

Women's College Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.
Institute of Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

David McCready (D)

Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.

Tulin D Cil (TD)

Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.

Frances C Wright (FC)

Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.

Jordan Lerner-Ellis (J)

Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada.

Jeanna McCuaig (J)

Institute of Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Tracy Graham (T)

Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.

Ping Sun (P)

Women's College Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.

Mohammad R Akbari (MR)

Women's College Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.
Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH