A search of the M1genome sequence, which includes 97% of the Myxococcus xanthus genes, identified 53 sequence homologs of 54 -dependent enhancer binding proteins (EBPs). A DNA microarray was constructed from the M1genome that includes those homologs and 318 other M. xanthus genes for comparison. To screen the developmental program with this array, an RNA extract from growing cells was compared with one prepared from developing cells at 12 h. Previous reporter studies had shown that M. xanthus has initiated development and has begun to express many developmentally regulated genes by 12 h. The comparison revealed substantial increases in the expression levels of 11 transcription factors that may respond to environmental stimuli. Six of the 53 EBP homologs were expressed at significantly higher levels at 12 h of development than during growth. Three were previously unknown genes, and they were inactivated to look for effects on fruiting body development. One knockout mutant produced fruiting bodies of abnormal shape that depended on the composition of the medium.

After repeated media attention in 2013 due to the Angelina Jolie disclosure and the Supreme Court decision to ban gene patents, the demand for cancer genetic counseling and testing services has never been greater. Debate has arisen regarding who should provide such services and the quality of genetics services being offered. In this ongoing case series, we document 35 new cases from 7 states (California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Utah) and the District of Columbia of adverse outcomes in cancer genetic testing when performed without the involvement of a certified genetic counselor. We identified 3 major themes of errors: wrong genetic tests ordered, genetic test results misinterpreted, and inadequate genetic counseling. Patient morbidity and mortality were an issue in several of these cases. The complexity of cancer genetic testing and counseling has grown exponentially with the advent of multigene panels that include rare genes and the potential for more variants of uncertain significance. We conclude that genetic counseling and testing should be offered by certified genetics providers to minimize the risks, maximize the benefits, and utilize health care dollars most efficiently.

For poorly understood reasons, Black non‐Hispanic (BNH) women meeting National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for genetic testing for breast cancer risk are less likely than White non‐Hispanic (WNH) women to undergo testing (Armstrong, Micco, Carney, Stopfer, & Putt, JAMA, 293, 1729 and 2005). We compared physician referral rates and uptake for genetic testing of BNH and WNH women meeting select NCCN criteria (breast cancer under age 50, two primary breast cancers, triple‐negative disease under age 60) in the Cancer Center at George Washington University (GWCC) between 2015 and 2018. Of the 723 BNH and WNH patients treated for breast cancer at GWCC, 28% met study criteria for genetic counseling referral (n = 252; BNH n = 115, WNH n = 137). Physician referral rates to genetic counseling differed significantly by race (BNH 75.7%, n = 87 and WNH 92.7%; n = 127; χ2 = 14.19, p‐value < .01). Once referred, though, there was no significant difference in uptake of genetic counseling by race (BNH 95.4%, n = 83; WNH 97.6%, n = 124, χ2 = 1.33, p‐value = .25) for patients appropriately referred.