17 research outputs found

    A Case for Inclusion of Genetic Counselors in Cardiac Care

    Get PDF
    Recent advances in genetic testing for heritable cardiac diseases have led to an increasing involvement of the genetic counselor in cardiology practice. We present a series of cases collected from a nationwide query of genetics professionals regarding issues related to cost and utilization of genetic testing. Three themes emerged across cases: (1) choosing the most appropriate genetic test, (2) choosing the best person to test, and (3) interpreting results accurately. These cases demonstrate that involvement of a genetic counselor throughout the evaluation, diagnosis, and continuing management of individuals and families with inherited cardiovascular conditions helps to promote the efficient use of healthcare dollars

    Beta catenin and cytokine pathway dysregulation in patients with manifestations of the "PTEN hamartoma tumor syndrome"

    Get PDF
    Background. The "PTEN hamartoma tumor syndrome" (PHTS) includes a group of syndromes caused by germline mutations within the tumor suppressor gene "phosphatase and tensin homolog deleted on chromosome ten" (PTEN), characterized by multiple polyps in the gastrointestinal tract and by a highly increased risk of developing malignant tumours in many tissues. The current work clarifies the molecular basis of PHTS in three unrelated Italian patients, and sheds light on molecular pathway disregulation constitutively associated to PTEN alteration. Methods. We performed a combination of RT-PCR, PCR, sequencing of the amplified fragments, Real Time PCR and western blot techniques. Results. Our data provide the first evidence of ÎČ-catenin accumulation in blood cells of patients with hereditary cancer syndrome caused by germ-line PTEN alteration. In addition, for the first time we show, in all PHTS patients analysed, alterations in the expression of TNFα, its receptors and IL-10. Importantly, the isoform of TNFRI that lacks the DEATH domain (TNFRSF1ÎČ) was found to be overexpressed. Conclusion. In light of our findings, we suggest that the PTEN pathway disregulation could determine, in non-neoplastic cells of PHTS patients, cell survival and pro-inflammatory stimulation, mediated by the expression of molecules such as ÎČ-catenin, TNFα and TNFα receptors, which could predispose these patients to the development of multiple cancers

    The prevalence of MADH4 and BMPR1A mutations in juvenile polyposis and absence of BMPR2, BMPR1B, and ACVR1 mutations

    No full text
    Background: Juvenile polyposis (JP) is an autosomal dominant syndrome predisposing to colorectal and gastric cancer. We have identified mutations in two genes causing JP, MADH4 and bone morphogenetic protein receptor 1A (BMPR1A): both are involved in bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) mediated signalling and are members of the TGF-ß superfamily. This study determined the prevalence of mutations in MADH4 and BMPR1A, as well as three other BMP/activin pathway candidate genes in a large number of JP patients. Methods: DNA was extracted from the blood of JP patients and used for PCR amplification of each exon of these five genes, using primers flanking each intron–exon boundary. Mutations were determined by comparison to wild type sequences using sequence analysis software. A total of 77 JP cases were sequenced for mutations in the MADH4, BMPR1A, BMPR1B, BMPR2, and/or ACVR1 (activin A receptor) genes. The latter three genes were analysed when MADH4 and BMPR1A sequencing found no mutations. Results: Germline MADH4 mutations were found in 14 cases (18.2%) and BMPR1A mutations in 16 cases (20.8%). No mutations were found in BMPR1B, BMPR2, or ACVR1 in 32 MADH4 and BMPR1A mutation negative cases. Discussion: In the largest series of JP patients reported to date, the prevalence of germline MADH4 and BMPR1A mutations is approximately 20% for each gene. Since mutations were not found in more than half the JP patients, either additional genes predisposing to JP remain to be discovered, or alternate means of inactivation of the two known genes are responsible for these JP cases

    Risk assessment and genetic counseling for Lynch syndrome – Practice resource of the National Society of Genetic Counselors and the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer

    Full text link
    Identifying individuals who have Lynch syndrome involves a complex diagnostic workup that includes taking a detailed family history and a combination of various tests such as immunohistochemistry and/or molecular which may be germline and/or somatic. The National Society of Genetic Counselors and the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer have come together to publish this practice resource for the evaluation of Lynch syndrome. The purpose of this practice resource was to provide guidance and a testing algorithm for Lynch syndrome as well as recommendations on when to offer testing. This practice resource does not replace a consultation with a genetics professional. This practice resource includes explanations in support of this and a summary of background data. While this practice resource is not intended to serve as a review of Lynch syndrome, it includes a discussion of background information and cites a number of key publications which should be reviewed for a more in-depth understanding. This practice resource is intended for genetic counselors, geneticists, gastroenterologists, surgeons, medical oncologists, obstetricians and gynecologists, nurses, and other healthcare providers who evaluate patients for Lynch syndrome.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/172941/1/jgc41546.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/172941/2/jgc41546_am.pd

    Discovery of the BMPR1A promoter and germline mutations that cause juvenile polyposis

    No full text
    Juvenile polyposis (JP) is an autosomal dominant hamartomatous polyposis syndrome where affected individuals are predisposed to colorectal and upper gastrointestinal cancer. Forty-five percent of JP patients have mutations or deletions involving the coding regions of SMAD4 and BMPR1A, but the genetic basis of other cases is unknown. We set out to identify the JP gene in a large kindred having 10 affected members without SMAD4 or BMPR1A coding sequence mutations or deletions. We found a germline deletion segregating in all affected members, mapping 119 kb upstream of the coding region of BMPR1A by multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification and comparative genomic hybridization. To further understand the genomic structure of BMPR1A, we performed 5â€Č RACE from lymphoblastoid cell lines and normal colon tissue, which revealed four non-coding (NC) exons and two putative promoters. Further analysis of this deletion showed that it encompassed 12 433 bp, including one promoter and NC exon. The activities of each promoter and deletion constructs were evaluated by luciferase assays, and the stronger promoter sequence analyzed for changes in JP patients without SMAD4 or BMPR1A alterations. A total of 6 of 65 JP probands were found to have mutations affecting this promoter. All probands examined had diminished BMPR1A protein by ELISA, and all promoter mutations but one led to significantly reduced luciferase activity relative to the wild-type promoter reporter. We conclude that we have identified the promoter for BMPR1A, in which mutations may be responsible for as many as 10% of JP cases with unknown mutations

    Participation of low-income women in genetic cancer risk assessment and BRCA 1/2 testing: the experience of a safety-net institution

    No full text
    Some communities and populations lack access to genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA) and testing. This is particularly evident in safety-net institutions, which serve a large segment of low-income, uninsured individuals. We describe the experience of a safety-net clinic with limited resources in providing GCRA and BRCA1/2 testing. We compared the proportion and characteristics of high-risk women who were offered and underwent GCRA and genetic testing. We also provide a description of the mutation profile for affected women. All 125 patients who were offered GCRA accepted to undergo GCRA. Of these, 72 % had a breast cancer diagnosis, 70 % were Hispanic, 52.8 % were non-English speakers, and 66 % did not have health insurance. Eighty four (67 %) were offered genetic testing and 81 (96 %) agreed. Hispanic women, those with no medical insurance, and those with a family history of breast cancer were significantly more likely to undergo testing (p > 0.01). Twelve of 81 (15 %) patients were found to have deleterious mutations, seven BRCA1, and five BRCA2. Our experience shows that it is possible to offer GCRA and genetic testing even in the setting of limited resources for these services. This is important given that a large majority of the low-income women in our study agreed to undergo counseling and testing. Our experience could serve as a model for similar low-resource safety-net health settings
    corecore