Direct Genetics Referral Pathway for High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer Patients: The opt-Out Process

Purpose. In order to meet a clinical need for better pathways to access genetic testing for ovarian cancer patients, we implemented and reviewed an opt-out referral process for genetic consultation whereby a referral is automatically sent to genetics following a pathological diagnosis of HGSC. Methods. Following implementation of the opt-out referral process, each month a list of new cases of HGSC was generated from the synoptic pathology report and forwarded directly to the Cancer Genetics clinic. Using an advanced directive, patients were automatically referred for genetic counselling two months after surgery. If the patient declined genetic counselling (opted-out) after discussion with their surgeon within the two months after surgery, the Genetic Counsellor was informed and the patient was removed from the referral process. Results. Between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2017, 168 women were diagnosed with HGSC, of whom 167 received a referral for genetic consultation. In only one case the referral was cancelled by the surgeon, resulting in a referral rate of 99.4%. By the end of the study period, 133 women attended a genetics consultation appointment and 125 (94%) agreed to proceed with genetic testing. Among those who completed genetic testing, 15% tested positive for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation. Of the women who tested positive for a BRCA1/2 mutation, 56% had no family history of breast or ovarian cancer. Conclusions. The opt-out referral process described in this study is s a feasible, effective, and patient-centred approach to increase access to BRCA1/2 testing for patients with ovarian cancer

Incidental findings from cancer next generation sequencing panels

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have facilitated multi-gene panel (MGP) testing to detect germline DNA variants in hereditary cancer patients. This sensitive technique can uncover unexpected, non-germline incidental findings indicative of mosaicism, clonal hematopoiesis (CH), or hematologic malignancies. A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify cases of incidental findings from NGS-MGP testing. Inclusion criteria included: 1) multiple pathogenic variants in the same patient; 2) pathogenic variants at a low allele fraction; and/or 3) the presence of pathogenic variants not consistent with family history. Secondary tissue analysis, complete blood count (CBC) and medical record review were conducted to further delineate the etiology of the pathogenic variants. Of 6060 NGS-MGP tests, 24 cases fulfilling our inclusion criteria were identified. Pathogenic variants were detected in TP53, ATM, CHEK2, BRCA1 and APC. 18/24 (75.0%) patients were classified as CH, 3/24 (12.5%) as mosaic, 2/24 (8.3%) related to a hematologic malignancy, and 1/24 (4.2%) as true germline. We describe a case-specific workflow to identify and interpret the nature of incidental findings on NGS-MGP. This workflow will provide oncology and genetic clinics a practical guide for the management and counselling of patients with unexpected NGS-MGP findings

Direct Genetics Referral Pathway for High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer Patients: The “Opt-Out” Process

Purpose. In order to meet a clinical need for better pathways to access genetic testing for ovarian cancer patients, we implemented and reviewed an opt-out referral process for genetic consultation whereby a referral is automatically sent to genetics following a pathological diagnosis of HGSC. Methods. Following implementation of the opt-out referral process, each month a list of new cases of HGSC was generated from the synoptic pathology report and forwarded directly to the Cancer Genetics clinic. Using an advanced directive, patients were automatically referred for genetic counselling two months after surgery. If the patient declined genetic counselling (opted-out) after discussion with their surgeon within the two months after surgery, the Genetic Counsellor was informed and the patient was removed from the referral process. Results. Between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2017, 168 women were diagnosed with HGSC, of whom 167 received a referral for genetic consultation. In only one case the referral was cancelled by the surgeon, resulting in a referral rate of 99.4%. By the end of the study period, 133 women attended a genetics consultation appointment and 125 (94%) agreed to proceed with genetic testing. Among those who completed genetic testing, 15% tested positive for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation. Of the women who tested positive for a BRCA1/2 mutation, 56% had no family history of breast or ovarian cancer. Conclusions. The opt-out referral process described in this study is s a feasible, effective, and patient-centred approach to increase access to BRCA1/2 testing for patients with ovarian cancer

Contraceptive use and the risk of ovarian cancer among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation

Background BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) mutation carriers face a high lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer. Oral contraceptives are protective in this population; however, the impact of other types of contraception (e.g. intrauterine devices, implants, injections) is unknown. We undertook a matched case-control study to evaluate the relationship between type of contraception and risk of ovarian cancer among women with BRCA mutations. Methods A total of 1733 matched pairs were included in this analysis. Women were matched according to year of birth, date of study entry, country of residence, BRCA mutation type and history of breast cancer. Detailed information on hormonal, reproductive and lifestyle exposures were collected from a routinely administered questionnaire. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) associated with each contraceptive exposure. Results Ever use of any contraceptive was significantly associated with reduced risk of ovarian cancer (OR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.52-0.75; P < 0.0001), which was driven by significant inverse associations with oral contraceptives (OR = 0.66; 95% CI 0.54-0.79; P < 0.0001) and contraceptive implants (OR = 0.30; 95% CI 0.12-0.73; P = 0.008). We observed a similar effect with use of injections (OR = 0.37; 95% CI 0.10-1.38; P = 0.14), but this did not achieve significance. No significant associations were observed between patterns of intrauterine device use and risk of ovarian cancer. Conclusions These findings support a protective effect of oral contraceptives and implants on risk of ovarian cancer among women with BRCA mutations. The possible protective effect of injections requires further evaluation

Prospective evaluation of body size and breast cancer risk among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

BACKGROUND:Although evidence suggests that larger body size in early life confers lifelong protection from developing breast cancer, few studies have investigated the relationship between body size and breast cancer risk among BRCA mutation carriers. Therefore, we conducted a prospective evaluation of body size and the risk of breast cancer among BRCA mutation carriers. METHODS:Current height and body mass index (BMI) at age 18 were determined from baseline questionnaires. Current BMI and weight change since age 18 were calculated from updated biennial follow-up questionnaires. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS:Among 3734 BRCA mutation carriers, there were 338 incident breast cancers over a mean follow-up of 5.5 years. There was no association between height, current BMI or weight change and breast cancer risk. Women with BMI at age 18 ≥22.1 kg/m2 had a decreased risk of developing post-menopausal breast cancer compared with women with a BMI at age 18 between 18.8 and 20.3 kg/m2 (HR 0.49; 95% CI 0.30-0.82; P = 0.006). BMI at age 18 was not associated with risk of pre-menopausal breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS:There was no observed association between height, current BMI and weight change and risk of breast cancer. The inverse relationship between greater BMI at age 18 and post-menopausal breast cancer further supports a role of early rather than current or adulthood exposures for BRCA-associated breast cancer development. Future studies with longer follow-up and additional measures of adiposity are necessary to confirm these findings