Mixed-methods evaluation of the NHS Genomic Medicine Service for paediatric rare diseases: study protocol [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]

Background: A new nationally commissioned NHS England Genomic Medicine Service (GMS) was recently established to deliver genomic testing with equity of access for patients affected by rare diseases and cancer. The overarching aim of this research is to evaluate the implementation of the GMS during its early years, identify barriers and enablers to successful implementation, and provide recommendations for practice. The focus will be on the use of genomic testing for paediatric rare diseases. / Methods: This will be a four-year mixed-methods research programme using clinic observations, interviews and surveys. Study 1 consists of qualitative interviews with designers/implementers of the GMS in Year 1 of the research programme, along with documentary analysis to understand the intended outcomes for the Service. These will be revisited in Year 4 to compare intended outcomes with what happened in practice, and to identify barriers and facilitators that were encountered along the way. Study 2 consists of clinic observations (pre-test counselling and results disclosure) to examine the interaction between health professionals and parents, along with follow-up interviews with both after each observation. Study 3 consists of a longitudinal survey with parents at two timepoints (time of testing and 12 months post-results) along with follow-up interviews, to examine parent-reported experiences and outcomes. Study 4 consists of qualitative interviews and a cross-sectional survey with medical specialists to identify preparedness, facilitators and challenges to mainstreaming genomic testing. The use of theory-based and pre-specified constructs will help generalise the findings and enable integration across the various sub-studies. / Dissemination: We will disseminate our results to policymakers as findings emerge, so any suggested changes to service provision can be considered in a timely manner. A workshop with key stakeholders will be held in Year 4 to develop and agree a set of recommendations for practice

Developing an intervention to facilitate family communication about inherited genetic conditions, and training genetic counsellors in its delivery.

Many families experience difficulty in talking about an inherited genetic condition that affects one or more of them. There have now been a number of studies identifying the issues in detail, however few have developed interventions to assist families. The SPRinG collaborative have used the UK Medical Research Council's guidance on Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions, to work with families and genetic counsellors (GCs) to co-design a psycho-educational intervention to facilitate family communication and promote better coping and adaptation to living with an inherited genetic condition for parents and their children (<18 years). The intervention is modelled on multi-family discussion groups (MFDGs) used in psychiatric settings. The MFDG was developed and tested over three phases. First focus groups with parents, young people, children and health professionals discussed whether MFDG was acceptable and proposed a suitable design. Using evidence and focus group data, the intervention and a training manual were developed and three GCs were trained in its delivery. Finally, a prototype MFDG was led by a family therapist and co-facilitated by the three GCs. Data analysis showed that families attending the focus groups and intervention thought MFDG highly beneficial, and the pilot sessions had a significant impact on their family' functioning. We also demonstrated that it is possible to train GCs to deliver the MFDG intervention. Further studies are now required to test the feasibility of undertaking a definitive randomised controlled trial to evaluate its effectiveness in improving family outcomes before implementing into genetic counselling practice.The National Institute of Health Research funded the study but any views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the Authority. Funded by NIHR reference number: RP-DG-1211-10015

Differential clonal evolution in oesophageal cancers in response to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy

How chemotherapy affects carcinoma genomes is largely unknown. Here we report whole-exome and deep sequencing of 30 paired oesophageal adenocarcinomas sampled before and after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Most, but not all, good responders pass through genetic bottlenecks, a feature associated with higher mutation burden pre-treatment. Some poor responders pass through bottlenecks, but re-grow by the time of surgical resection, suggesting a missed therapeutic opportunity. Cancers often show major changes in driver mutation presence or frequency after treatment, owing to outgrowth persistence or loss of sub-clones, copy number changes, polyclonality and/or spatial genetic heterogeneity. Post-therapy mutation spectrum shifts are also common, particularly C&gt;A and TT&gt;CT changes in good responders or bottleneckers. Post-treatment samples may also acquire mutations in known cancer driver genes (for example, SF3B1, TAF1 and CCND2) that are absent from the paired pre-treatment sample. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy can rapidly and profoundly affect the oesophageal adenocarcinoma genome. Monitoring molecular changes during treatment may be clinically useful

Safety and utility of image-guided research biopsies in relapsed high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma-experience of the BriTROC consortium.

BACKGROUND: Investigating tumour evolution and acquired chemotherapy resistance requires analysis of sequential tumour material. We describe the feasibility of obtaining research biopsies in women with relapsed ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC). METHODS: Women with relapsed ovarian HGSC underwent either image-guided biopsy or intra-operative biopsy during secondary debulking, and samples were fixed in methanol-based fixative. Tagged-amplicon sequencing was performed on biopsy DNA. RESULTS: We screened 519 patients in order to enrol 220. Two hundred and two patients underwent successful biopsy, 118 of which were image-guided. There were 22 study-related adverse events (AE) in the image-guided biopsies, all grades 1 and 2; pain was the commonest AE. There were pre-specified significant AE in 3/118 biopsies (2.5%). 87% biopsies were fit-for-purpose for genomic analyses. Median DNA yield was 2.87 μg, and was higher in biopsies utilising 14 G or 16 G needles compared to 18 G. TP53 mutations were identified in 94.4% patients. CONCLUSIONS: Obtaining tumour biopsies for research in relapsed HGSC is safe and feasible. Adverse events are rare. The large majority of biopsies yield sufficient DNA for genomic analyses-we recommend use of larger gauge needles and methanol fixation for such biopsies, as DNA yields are higher but with no increase in AEs

Whole-genome sequencing reveals clinically relevant insights into the aetiology of familial breast cancers.

BACKGROUND: Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is a powerful method for revealing the diversity and complexity of the somatic mutation burden of tumours. Here, we investigated the utility of tumour and matched germline WGS for understanding aetiology and treatment opportunities for high-risk individuals with familial breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We carried out WGS on 78 paired germline and tumour DNA samples from individuals carrying pathogenic variants in BRCA1 (n = 26) or BRCA2 (n = 22) or from non-carriers (non-BRCA1/2; n = 30). RESULTS: Matched germline/tumour WGS and somatic mutational signature analysis revealed patients with unreported, dual pathogenic germline variants in cancer risk genes (BRCA1/BRCA2; BRCA1/MUTYH). The strategy identified that 100% of tumours from BRCA1 carriers and 91% of tumours from BRCA2 carriers exhibited biallelic inactivation of the respective gene, together with somatic mutational signatures suggestive of a functional deficiency in homologous recombination. A set of non-BRCA1/2 tumours also had somatic signatures indicative of BRCA-deficiency, including tumours with BRCA1 promoter methylation, and tumours from carriers of a PALB2 pathogenic germline variant and a BRCA2 variant of uncertain significance. A subset of 13 non-BRCA1/2 tumours from early onset cases were BRCA-proficient, yet displayed complex clustered structural rearrangements associated with the amplification of oncogenes and pathogenic germline variants in TP53, ATM and CHEK2. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the role that WGS of matched germline/tumour DNA and the somatic mutational signatures can play in the discovery of pathogenic germline variants and for providing supporting evidence for variant pathogenicity. WGS-derived signatures were more robust than germline status and other genomic predictors of homologous recombination deficiency, thus impacting the selection of platinum-based or PARP inhibitor therapy. In this first examination of non-BRCA1/2 tumours by WGS, we illustrate the considerable heterogeneity of these tumour genomes and highlight that complex genomic rearrangements may drive tumourigenesis in a subset of cases

Communication about genetic testing with breast and ovarian cancer patients: a scoping review

© 2018, The Author(s). Genetic testing of patients with cancer is increasingly offered to guide management, resulting in a growing need for oncology health professionals to communicate genetics information and facilitate informed decision-making in a short time frame. This scoping review aimed to map and synthesise what is known about health professionals’ communication about genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer with cancer patients. Four databases were systematically searched using a recognised scoping review method. Areas and types of research were mapped and a narrative synthesis of the findings was undertaken. Twenty-nine papers from 25 studies were included. Studies were identified about (i) information needs, (ii) process and content of genetic counselling, (iii) cognitive and emotional impact, including risk perception and recall, understanding and interpretation of genetic test results, and anxiety and distress, (iv) patients’ experiences, (v) communication shortly after diagnosis and (vi) alternatives to face-to-face genetic counselling. Patients’ need for cancer-focused, personalised information is not always met by genetic counselling. Genetic counselling tends to focus on biomedical information at the expense of psychological support. For most patients, knowledge is increased and anxiety is not raised by pre-test communication. However, some patients experience anxiety and distress when results are disclosed, particularly those tested shortly after diagnosis who are unprepared or unsupported. For many patients, pre-test communication by methods other than face-to-face genetic counselling is acceptable. Research is needed to identify patients who may benefit from genetic counselling and support and to investigate communication about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer by oncology health professionals

<i>ABCB1</i> (MDR1) induction defines a common resistance mechanism in paclitaxel- and olaparib-resistant ovarian cancer cells

BACKGROUND: Clinical response to chemotherapy for ovarian cancer is frequently compromised by the development of drug-resistant disease. The underlying molecular mechanisms and implications for prescription of routinely prescribed chemotherapy drugs are poorly understood. METHODS: We created novel A2780-derived ovarian cancer cell lines resistant to paclitaxel and olaparib following continuous incremental drug selection. MTT assays were used to assess chemosensitivity to paclitaxel and olaparib in drug-sensitive and drug-resistant cells±the ABCB1 inhibitors verapamil and elacridar and cross-resistance to cisplatin, carboplatin, doxorubicin, rucaparib, veliparib and AZD2461. ABCB1 expression was assessed by qRT-PCR, copy number, western blotting and immunohistochemical analysis and ABCB1 activity assessed by the Vybrant and P-glycoprotein-Glo assays. RESULTS: Paclitaxel-resistant cells were cross-resistant to olaparib, doxorubicin and rucaparib but not to veliparib or AZD2461. Resistance correlated with increased ABCB1 expression and was reversible following treatment with the ABCB1 inhibitors verapamil and elacridar. Active efflux of paclitaxel, olaparib, doxorubicin and rucaparib was confirmed in drug-resistant cells and in ABCB1-expressing bacterial membranes. CONCLUSIONS: We describe a common ABCB1-mediated mechanism of paclitaxel and olaparib resistance in ovarian cancer cells. Optimal choice of PARP inhibitor may therefore limit the progression of drug-resistant disease, while routine prescription of first-line paclitaxel may significantly limit subsequent chemotherapy options in ovarian cancer patients

Candidate biomarkers of PARP inhibitor sensitivity in ovarian cancer beyond the BRCA genes

BACKGROUND: Olaparib (Lynparza™) is a PARP inhibitor approved for advanced BRCA-mutated (BRCAm) ovarian cancer. PARP inhibitors may benefit patients whose tumours are dysfunctional in DNA repair mechanisms unrelated to BRCA1/2. We report exploratory analyses, including the long-term outcome of candidate biomarkers of sensitivity to olaparib in BRCA wild-type (BRCAwt) tumours. METHODS: Tumour samples from an olaparib maintenance monotherapy trial (Study 19, D0810C00019; NCT00753545) were analysed. Analyses included classification of mutations in genes involved in homologous recombination repair (HRR), BRCA1 promoter methylation status, measurement of BRCA1 protein and Myriad HRD score. RESULTS: Patients with BRCAm tumours gained most benefit from olaparib; a similar treatment benefit was also observed in 21/95 patients whose tumours were BRCAwt but had loss-of-function HRR mutations compared to patients with no detectable HRR mutations (58/95). A higher median Myriad MyChoice® HRD score was observed in BRCAm and BRCAwt tumours with BRCA1 methylation. Patients without BRCAm tumours derived benefit from olaparib treatment vs placebo although to a lesser extent than BRCAm patients.CONCLUSIONS: Ovarian cancer patients with tumours harbouring loss-of-function mutations in HRR genes other than BRCA1/2 may constitute a small, molecularly identifiable and clinically relevant population who derive treatment benefit from olaparib similar to patients with BRCAm

Measurement error adjustment in essential fatty acid intake from a food frequency questionnaire: alternative approaches and methods

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>We aimed at assessing the degree of measurement error in essential fatty acid intakes from a food frequency questionnaire and the impact of correcting for such an error on precision and bias of odds ratios in logistic models. To assess these impacts, and for illustrative purposes, alternative approaches and methods were used with the binary outcome of cognitive decline in verbal fluency.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Using the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study, we conducted a sensitivity analysis. The error-prone exposure – visit 1 fatty acid intake (1987–89) – was available for 7,814 subjects 50 years or older at baseline with complete data on cognitive decline between visits 2 (1990–92) and 4 (1996–98). Our binary outcome of interest was clinically significant decline in verbal fluency. Point estimates and 95% confidence intervals were compared between naïve and measurement-error adjusted odds ratios of decline with every SD increase in fatty acid intake as % of energy. Two approaches were explored for adjustment: (A) External validation against biomarkers (plasma fatty acids in cholesteryl esters and phospholipids) and (B) Internal repeat measurements at visits 2 and 3. The main difference between the two is that Approach B makes a stronger assumption regarding lack of error correlations in the structural model. Additionally, we compared results from regression calibration (RCAL) to those from simulation extrapolation (SIMEX). Finally, using structural equations modeling, we estimated attenuation factors associated with each dietary exposure to assess degree of measurement error in a bivariate scenario for regression calibration of logistic regression model.</p> <p>Results and conclusion</p> <p>Attenuation factors for Approach A were smaller than B, suggesting a larger amount of measurement error in the dietary exposure. Replicate measures (Approach B) unlike concentration biomarkers (Approach A) may lead to imprecise odds ratios due to larger standard errors. Using SIMEX rather than RCAL models tends to preserve precision of odds ratios. We found in many cases that bias in naïve odds ratios was towards the null. RCAL tended to correct for a larger amount of effect bias than SIMEX, particularly for Approach A.</p