Patient Perspective on the Value of Genetic Counselling for Familial Pancreas Cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Purpose</p> <p>To assess patient views regarding the value of genetic counselling for familial pancreas cancer in the absence of predictive genetic testing.</p> <p>Patients and methods</p> <p>At-risk adults with three or more relatives with pancreas cancer received genetic counselling prior to research screening via endoscopic ultrasound. Questionnaires were mailed after the visit to assess perceived value of the counselling session.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Ninety-three percent of respondents felt genetic counselling for pancreas cancer was helpful despite the lack of a causative gene, while only 7% felt that it should not be offered until such a gene is discovered. Over half of respondents believed the pancreas cancer in their family was caused by a gene mutation, and 42% thought they had inherited the mutation. The average perceived lifetime risk of developing pancreas cancer was 51%, and 87% of respondents would ultimately seek predictive genetic testing. When more information is gained, 89% would be interested in another genetic counselling session, and 82% would recommend current genetic counselling for pancreas cancer to a friend or relative with a family history of the disease.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Despite the lack of an identified major causative gene for pancreas cancer, respondents found genetic counselling for this malignancy to be helpful. These patients perceive their personal cancer risk to be high, and would seek predictive genetic testing if it were available. Referral for genetic counselling should be offered to appropriate individuals.</p

Linkage and related analyses of Barrett's esophagus and its associated adenocarcinomas

BACKGROUND: Familial aggregation and segregation analysis studies have provided evidence of a genetic basis for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and its premalignant precursor, Barrett's esophagus (BE). We aim to demonstrate the utility of linkage analysis to identify the genomic regions that might contain the genetic variants that predispose individuals to this complex trait (BE and EAC). METHODS: We genotyped 144 individuals in 42 multiplex pedigrees chosen from 1000 singly ascertained BE/EAC pedigrees, and performed both model‐based and model‐free linkage analyses, using S.A.G.E. and other software. Segregation models were fitted, from the data on both the 42 pedigrees and the 1000 pedigrees, to determine parameters for performing model‐based linkage analysis. Model‐based and model‐free linkage analyses were conducted in two sets of pedigrees: the 42 pedigrees and a subset of 18 pedigrees with female affected members that are expected to be more genetically homogeneous. Genome‐wide associations were also tested in these families. RESULTS: Linkage analyses on the 42 pedigrees identified several regions consistently suggestive of linkage by different linkage analysis methods on chromosomes 2q31, 12q23, and 4p14. A linkage on 15q26 is the only consistent linkage region identified in the 18 female‐affected pedigrees, in which the linkage signal is higher than in the 42 pedigrees. Other tentative linkage signals are also reported. CONCLUSION: Our linkage study of BE/EAC pedigrees identified linkage regions on chromosomes 2, 4, 12, and 15, with some reported associations located within our linkage peaks. Our linkage results can help prioritize association tests to delineate the genetic determinants underlying susceptibility to BE and EAC

RNA Sequencing Identifies Transcriptionally Viable Gene Fusions in Esophageal Adenocarcinomas

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is a deadly cancer with increasing incidence in the U.S., but mechanisms underlying pathogenesis are still mostly elusive. In addressing this question, we assessed gene-fusion landscapes by comprehensive RNA sequencing (RNAseq) of 55 pre-treatment EAC and 49 non-malignant biopsy tissues from patients undergoing endoscopy for Barrett’s esophagus. In this cohort, we identified 21 novel candidate EAC-associated fusions occurring in 3.33%-11.67% of EACs. Two candidate fusions were selected for validation by PCR and Sanger sequencing in an independent set of pre-treatment EAC (N=115) and non-malignant (N=183) biopsy tissues. In particular, we observed RPS6KB1–VMP1 gene fusion as a recurrent event occurring in ~10% of EAC cases. Notably, EAC cases harboring RPS6KB1–VMP1 fusions exhibited significantly poorer overall survival as compared to fusion-negative cases. Mechanistic investigations established that the RPS6KB1–VMP1 transcript coded for a fusion protein which significantly enhanced the growth rate of non-dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus cells. Compared to the wild-type VMP1 protein, which mediates normal cellular autophagy, RPS6KB1–VMP1 fusion exhibited aberrant subcellular localization and was relatively ineffective in triggering autophagy. Overall, our findings identified RPS6KB1–VMP1 as a genetic fusion that promotes EAC by modulating autophagy-related processes, offering new insights into the molecular pathogenesis of esophageal adenocarcinomas

Identifying DNA methylation biomarkers for non-endoscopic detection of Barrett’s esophagus

We report a biomarker-based non-endoscopic method for detecting Barrett’s esophagus (BE), based on detecting methylated DNAs retrieved via a swallowable balloon-based esophageal sampling device. BE is the precursor of, and a major recognized risk factor for, developing esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Endoscopy, the current standard for BE detection, is not cost-effective for population screening. We performed genome-wide screening to ascertain regions targeted for recurrent aberrant cytosine methylation in BE, identifying high-frequency methylation within the CCNA1 locus. We tested CCNA1 DNA methylation as a BE biomarker in cytology brushings of the distal esophagus from 173 individuals with or without BE. CCNA1 DNA methylation demonstrated an area under the curve (AUC)=0.95 for discriminating BE-related metaplasia and neoplasia cases versus normal individuals, performing identically to methylation of VIM DNA, an established BE biomarker. When combined, the resulting two biomarker panel was 95% sensitive and 91% specific. These results were replicated in an independent validation cohort of 149 individuals, who were assayed using the same cutoff values for test positivity established in the training population. To progress toward non-endoscopic esophageal screening, we engineered a well-tolerated, swallowable, encapsulated balloon device able to selectively sample the distal esophagus within 5 minutes. In balloon samples from 86 individuals, tests of CCNA1 plus VIM DNA methylation detected BE metaplasia with 90.3% sensitivity and 91.7% specificity. Combining the balloon sampling device with molecular assays of CCNA1 plus VIM DNA methylation enables an efficient, well-tolerated, sensitive, and specific method of screening at-risk populations for BE

Variation in Age at Cancer Diagnosis in Familial versus Nonfamilial Barrett's Esophagus

Genetic influences may be discerned in families that have multiple affected members and may manifest as an earlier age of cancer diagnosis. In this study we determine whether cancers develop at an earlier age in multiplex Familial Barrett’s Esophagus (FBE) kindreds, defined by 3 or more members affected by Barrett’s esophagus (BE) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC)

International cancer of the pancreas screening (CAPS) consortium summit on the management of patients with increased risk for familial pancreatic cancer

Background Screening individuals at increased risk for pancreatic cancer (PC) detects early, potentially curable, pancreatic neoplasia. Objective To develop consortium statements on screening, surveillance and management of high-risk individuals with an inherited predisposition to PC. Methods A 49-expert multidisciplinary international consortium met to discuss pancreatic screening and vote on statements. Consensus was considered reached if ≥75% agreed or disagreed. Results There was excellent agreement that, to be successful, a screening programme should detect and treat T1N0M0 margin-negative PC and high-grade dysplastic precursor lesions (pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm). It was agreed that the following were candidates for screening: first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with PC from a familial PC kindred with at least two affected FDRs; patients with Peutz–Jeghers syndrome; and p16, BRCA2 and hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) mutation carriers with ≥1 affected FDR. Consensus was not reached for the age to initiate screening or stop surveillance. It was agreed that initial screening should include endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and/or MRI/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography not CT or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. There was no consensus on the need for EUS fine-needle aspiration to evaluate cysts. There was disagreement on optimal screening modalities and intervals for follow-up imaging. When surgery is recommended it should be performed at a high-volume centre. There was great disagreement as to which screeni

Surveillance for pancreatic cancer in high-risk individuals

Background: Surveillance of individuals at high risk of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and its precursors might lead to better outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and outcomes of PDAC and high-risk neoplastic precursor lesions among such patients participating in surveillance programmes. Methods: A multicentre study was conducted through the International CAncer of the Pancreas Screening (CAPS) Consortium Registry to identify high-risk individuals who had undergone pancreatic resection or progressed to advanced PDAC while under surveillance. High-risk neoplastic precursor lesions were defined as: pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) 3, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia (IPMN) with high-grade dysplasia, and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours at least 2 cm in diameter. Results: Of 76 high-risk individuals identified in 11 surveillance programmes, 71 had undergone surgery and five had been diagnosed with inoperable PDAC. Of the 71 patients who underwent resection, 32 (45 per cent) had PDAC or a high-risk precursor (19 PDAC, 4 main-duct IPMN, 4 branch-duct IPMN, 5 PanIN-3); the other 39 patients had lesions thought to be associated with a lower risk of neoplastic progression. Age at least 65 years, female sex, carriage of a gene mutation and location of a lesion in the head/uncinate region were associated with high-risk precursor lesions or PDAC. The survival of high-risk individuals with low-risk neoplastic lesions did not differ from that in those with high-risk precursor lesions. Survival was worse among patients with PDAC. There was no surgery-related mortality. Conclusion: A high proportion of high-risk individuals who had surgical resection for screening- or surveillance-detected pancreatic lesions had a high-risk neoplastic precursor lesion or PDAC