Advances in DNA sequencing have made genetic testing fast and affordable, but limitations of testing processes are impeding realisation of patient benefits. Ovarian cancer exemplifies the potential value of genetic testing and the shortcomings of current pathways to access testing. Approximately 15% of ovarian cancer patients have a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation which has substantial implications for their personal management and that of their relatives. Unfortunately, in most countries, routine implementation of BRCA testing for ovarian cancer patients has been inconsistent and largely unsuccessful. We developed a rapid, robust, mainstream genetic testing pathway in which testing is undertaken by the trained cancer team with cascade testing to relatives performed by the genetics team. 207 women with ovarian cancer were offered testing through the mainstream pathway. All accepted. 33 (16%) had a BRCA mutation. The result informed management of 79% (121/154) women with active disease. Patient and clinician feedback was very positive. The pathway offers a 4-fold reduction in time and 13-fold reduction in resource requirement compared to the conventional testing pathway. The mainstream genetic testing pathway we present is effective, efficient and patient-centred. It can deliver rapid, robust, large-scale, cost-effective genetic testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2 and may serve as an exemplar for other genes and other diseases.
It is increasingly common in oncology practice to perform tumour sequencing using large cancer panels. For pathogenic sequence variants in cancer susceptibility genes identified on tumour-only sequencing, it is often unclear whether they are of somatic or constitutional (germline) origin. There is wide-spread disparity regarding both the extent to which systematic ‘germline-focussed analysis’ is carried out upon tumour sequencing data and for which variants follow-up analysis of a germline sample is carried out. Here we present analyses of paired sequencing data from 17 152 cancer samples, in which 1494 pathogenic sequence variants were identified across 65 cancer susceptibility genes. From these analyses, the European Society of Medical Oncology Precision Medicine Working Group Germline Subgroup has generated (i) recommendations regarding germline-focussed analyses of tumour-only sequencing data, (ii) indications for germline follow-up testing and (iii) guidance on patient information-giving and consent.
Advances in technology have led to a massive expansion in the capacity for genomic analysis, with a commensurate fall in costs. The clinical indications for genomic testing have evolved markedly; the volume of clinical sequencing has increased dramatically; and the range of clinical professionals involved in the process has broadened. There is general acceptance that our early dichotomous paradigms of variants being pathogenic–high risk and benign–no risk are overly simplistic. There is increasing recognition that the clinical interpretation of genomic data requires significant expertise in disease–gene-variant associations specific to each disease area. Inaccurate interpretation can lead to clinical mismanagement, inconsistent information within families and misdirection of resources. It is for this reason that ‘national subspecialist multidisciplinary meetings’ (MDMs) for genomic interpretation have been articulated as key for the new NHS Genomic Medicine Service, of which Cancer Variant Interpretation Group UK (CanVIG-UK) is an early exemplar. CanVIG-UK was established in 2017 and now has >100 UK members, including at least one clinical diagnostic scientist and one clinical cancer geneticist from each of the 25 regional molecular genetics laboratories of the UK and Ireland. Through CanVIG-UK, we have established national consensus around variant interpretation for cancer susceptibility genes via monthly national teleconferenced MDMs and collaborative data sharing using a secure online portal. We describe here the activities of CanVIG-UK, including exemplar outputs and feedback from the membership.
A 43-year-old man with a cardiac device for dilated cardiomyopathy presented with fever, night sweats, and weight loss. Investigations revealed pancytopenia, acute renal failure, abnormal lung function, and raised inflammatory markers. A renal biopsy demonstrated pauci-immune necrotizing crescentic glomerulonephritis. He was diagnosed with pulmonary-renal antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-negative systemic small vessel vasculitis. He commenced immunosuppression with prednisolone and cyclophosphamide with recovery from pancytopenia and improvement in renal function 3 months later. Subsequently, a bone marrow culture grew Mycobacterium fortuitum. Isolation on repeat peripheral mycobacterial blood cultures prompted treatment with ciprofloxacin and clarithromycin. Four months later, he presented with neutropenic sepsis, influenza A/H1N1, and Aspergillus flavus pneumonia. Despite treatment he deteriorated. A transthoracic echocardiogram revealed a vegetation on the right ventricular pacing wire. The device was removed. The vegetation revealed acid and alcohol fast bacilli on Ziehl-Neelsen staining and grew M. fortuitum on culture, sensitive to ciprofloxacin and clarithromycin. Despite device removal and antimicrobial therapy, the patient succumbed to treatment-related complications. The association between glomerulonephritis and endocarditis is well known; however, this is the first case to our knowledge describing pauci-immune necrotizing crescentic glomerulonephritis in the context of M. fortuitum endocarditis. Clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion for endocarditis in patients with a cardiac device who present with fever and pauci-immune necrotizing crescentic glomerulonephritis. Patients should be investigated with mycobacterial blood cultures, at least three sets of standard blood cultures and transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography. Clinicians should beware the perils of immunosuppression in the face of an occult sepsis.
SUMMARYBackground:Advances in DNA sequencing have made gene testing fast and affordable, but adaptation of clinical services to capitalise on this for patient benefit has been slow. Ovarian cancer exemplifies limitations of current systems and potential benefits of increased gene testing. Approximately 15% of ovarian cancer patients have a germline mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (collectively termed ‘BRCA’) and this has substantial implications for their personal management and that of their relatives. However, in most countries implementation of BRCA testing in ovarian cancer has been inconsistent and largely unsuccessful.Methods:We developed a mainstream pathway in which BRCA testing was undertaken by cancer team members after 30 minutes online training. Patients with a mutation were sent a genetic appointment with their results. Cascade testing to relatives was performed via standard clinical genetic procedures.Findings:207 women with ovarian cancer were offered gene testing through the mainstream pathway and all accepted. 33 (16%) had a BRCA mutation. The result informed management of 79% (121/154) women with active disease including 97% (32/33) women with a mutation. All mutation-positive women and ~3.5 relatives per family have been seen in genetics. Patient and clinician feedback was very positive. >95% found the pathway to be simple and effective. The pathway offers considerable reduction in time (~5-fold) and resource requirements (~13-fold) compared to the traditional genetic pathway. We estimate it would deliver £2.6M NHS cost savings per year, and would allow implementation of national testing recommendations with existing infrastructure.Interpretation:Mainstream genetic testing is effective, efficient and patient-centred and offers a mechanism for large-scale implementation of BRCA gene testing in cancer patients. The principles could be applied in many other countries and to many other areas of genomic medicine.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.