The ICR639 CPG NGS validation series: A resource to assess analytical sensitivity of cancer predisposition gene testing [version 1; referees: 2 approved]

The analytical sensitivity of a next generation sequencing (NGS) test reflects the ability of the test to detect real sequence variation. The evaluation of analytical sensitivity relies on the availability of gold-standard, validated, benchmarking datasets. For NGS analysis the availability of suitable datasets has been limited. Most laboratories undertake small scale evaluations using in-house data, and/or rely on in silico generated datasets to evaluate the performance of NGS variant detection pipelines. Cancer predisposition genes (CPGs), such as BRCA1 and BRCA2, are amongst the most widely tested genes in clinical practice today. Hundreds of providers across the world are now offering CPG testing using NGS methods. Validating and comparing the analytical sensitivity of CPG tests has proved difficult, due to the absence of comprehensive, orthogonally validated, benchmarking datasets of CPG pathogenic variants. To address this we present the ICR639 CPG NGS validation series. This dataset comprises data from 639 individuals. Each individual has sequencing data generated using the TruSight Cancer Panel (TSCP), a targeted NGS assay for the analysis of CPGs, together with orthogonally generated data showing the presence of at least one CPG pathogenic variant per individual. The set consists of 645 pathogenic variants in total. There is strong representation of the most challenging types of variants to detect, with 339 indels, including 16 complex indels and 24 with length greater than five base pairs and 74 exon copy number variations (CNVs) including 23 single exon CNVs. The series includes pathogenic variants in 31 CPGs, including 502 pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2, making this an important comprehensive validation dataset for providers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 NGS testing. We have deposited the TSCP FASTQ files of the ICR639 series in the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA) under accession number EGAD00001004134

Characteristics and outcomes of neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection in the UK: a prospective national cohort study using active surveillance.

BACKGROUND: Babies differ from older children with regard to their exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, data describing the effect of SARS-CoV-2 in this group are scarce, and guidance is variable. We aimed to describe the incidence, characteristics, transmission, and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection in neonates who received inpatient hospital care in the UK. METHODS: We carried out a prospective UK population-based cohort study of babies with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first 28 days of life who received inpatient care between March 1 and April 30, 2020. Infected babies were identified through active national surveillance via the British Paediatric Surveillance Unit, with linkage to national testing, paediatric intensive care audit, and obstetric surveillance data. Outcomes included incidence (per 10 000 livebirths) of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease, proportions of babies with suspected vertically and nosocomially acquired infection, and clinical outcomes. FINDINGS: We identified 66 babies with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (incidence 5·6 [95% CI 4·3-7·1] per 10 000 livebirths), of whom 28 (42%) had severe neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection (incidence 2·4 [1·6-3·4] per 10 000 livebirths). 16 (24%) of these babies were born preterm. 36 (55%) babies were from white ethnic groups (SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence 4·6 [3·2-6·4] per 10 000 livebirths), 14 (21%) were from Asian ethnic groups (15·2 [8·3-25·5] per 10 000 livebirths), eight (12%) were from Black ethnic groups (18·0 [7·8-35·5] per 10 000 livebirths), and seven (11%) were from mixed or other ethnic groups (5·6 [2·2-11·5] per 10 000 livebirths). 17 (26%) babies with confirmed infection were born to mothers with known perinatal SARS-CoV-2 infection, two (3%) were considered to have possible vertically acquired infection (SARS-CoV-2-positive sample within 12 h of birth where the mother was also positive). Eight (12%) babies had suspected nosocomially acquired infection. As of July 28, 2020, 58 (88%) babies had been discharged home, seven (11%) were still admitted, and one (2%) had died of a cause unrelated to SARS-CoV-2 infection. INTERPRETATION: Neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection is uncommon in babies admitted to hospital. Infection with neonatal admission following birth to a mother with perinatal SARS-CoV-2 infection was unlikely, and possible vertical transmission rare, supporting international guidance to avoid separation of mother and baby. The high proportion of babies from Black, Asian, or minority ethnic groups requires investigation. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Policy Research Programme

Evaluation of Cancer-Based Criteria for Use in MainstreamBRCA1andBRCA2Genetic Testing in Patients With Breast Cancer

Importance: Increasing BRCA1 and BRCA2 (collectively termed herein as BRCA) gene testing is required to improve cancer management and prevent BRCA-related cancers. Objective: To evaluate mainstream genetic testing using cancer-based criteria in patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: A quality improvement study and cost-effectiveness analysis of different BRCA testing selection criteria and access procedures to evaluate feasibility, acceptability, and mutation detection performance was conducted at the Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust as part of the Mainstreaming Cancer Genetics (MCG) Programme. Participants included 1184 patients with cancer who were undergoing genetic testing between September 1, 2013, and February 28, 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mutation rates, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were the primary outcomes. Results: Of the 1184 patients (1158 women [97.8%]) meeting simple cancer-based criteria, 117 had a BRCA mutation (9.9%). The mutation rate was similar in retrospective United Kingdom (10.2% [235 of 2294]) and prospective Malaysian (9.7% [103 of 1061]) breast cancer studies. If traditional family history criteria had been used, more than 50% of the mutation-positive individuals would have been missed. Of the 117 mutation-positive individuals, 115 people (98.3%) attended their genetics appointment and cascade to relatives is underway in all appropriate families (85 of 85). Combining with the equivalent ovarian cancer study provides 5 simple cancer-based criteria for BRCA testing with a 10% mutation rate: (1) ovarian cancer; (2) breast cancer diagnosed when patients are 45 years or younger; (3) 2 primary breast cancers, both diagnosed when patients are 60 years or younger; (4) triple-negative breast cancer; and (5) male breast cancer. A sixth criterion-breast cancer plus a parent, sibling, or child with any of the other criteria-can be added to address family history. Criteria 1 through 5 are considered the MCG criteria, and criteria 1 through 6 are considered the MCGplus criteria. Testing using MCG or MCGplus criteria is cost-effective with cost-effectiveness ratios of $1330 per discounted QALYs and$1225 per discounted QALYs, respectively, and appears to lead to cancer and mortality reductions (MCG: 804 cancers, 161 deaths; MCGplus: 1020 cancers, 204 deaths per year over 50 years). Use of MCG or MCGplus criteria might allow detection of all BRCA mutations in patients with breast cancer in the United Kingdom through testing one-third of patients. Feedback questionnaires from 259 patients and 23 cancer team members (12 oncologists, 8 surgeons, and 3 nurse specialists) showed acceptability of the process with 100% of patients pleased they had genetic testing and 100% of cancer team members confident to approve patients for genetic testing. Use of MCGplus criteria also appeared to be time and resource efficient, requiring 95% fewer genetic consultations than the traditional process. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that mainstream testing using simple, cancer-based criteria might be able to efficiently deliver consistent, cost-effective, patient-centered BRCA testing