9 research outputs found

    Implementation of Multigene Germline and Parallel Somatic Genetic Testing in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: SIGNPOST Study

    Get PDF
    We present findings of a cancer multidisciplinary-team (MDT) coordinated mainstreaming pathway of unselected 5-panel germline BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 and parallel somatic BRCA1/BRCA2 testing in all women with epithelial-OC and highlight the discordance between germline and somatic testing strategies across two cancer centres. Patients were counselled and consented by a cancer MDT member. The uptake of parallel multi-gene germline and somatic testing was 97.7%. Counselling by clinical-nurse-specialist more frequently needed >1 consultation (53.6% (30/56)) compared to a medical (15.0% (21/137)) or surgical oncologist (15.3% (17/110)) (p 0.001). The median age was 54 (IQR = 51–62) years in germline pathogenic-variant (PV) versus 61 (IQR = 51–71) in BRCA wild-type (p = 0.001). There was no significant difference in distribution of PVs by ethnicity, stage, surgery timing or resection status. A total of 15.5% germline and 7.8% somatic BRCA1/BRCA2 PVs were identified. A total of 2.3% patients had RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 PVs. A total of 11% germline PVs were large-genomic-rearrangements and missed by somatic testing. A total of 20% germline PVs are missed by somatic first BRCA-testing approach and 55.6% germline PVs missed by family history ascertainment. The somatic testing failure rate is higher (23%) for patients undergoing diagnostic biopsies. Our findings favour a prospective parallel somatic and germline panel testing approach as a clinically efficient strategy to maximise variant identification. UK Genomics test-directory criteria should be expanded to include a panel of OC genes.Peer reviewe

    The passage of fluid into the peritoneal cavity during hysteroscopy in pre-menopausal and post-menopausal patients

    No full text
    The present study aimed to determine the amount of fluid medium passing through the Fallopian tubes into the peritoneal cavity during a hysteroscopy. This was done to understand the pathophysiology of complications related to the hysteroscopy. Conducted in a general hospital setting, the study examined the fluid inflow–outflow during a hysteroscopy both in pre- and post-menopausal women. A hysteroscopy was performed vaginoscopically for both diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. The study involved 117 patients. 84 (71.8%) of them were pre-menopausal and 33 (28.2%) were classified as post-menopausal. The fluid volume difference in the peritoneal cavity prior to hysteroscopy was 26.0 ± 4.2 mL in the pre-menopausal and 7.7 ± 2.4 mL (p = .001) in the post-menopausal group. The pre-menopausal group’s flow rate through the Fallopian tubes was 1.5 ± 0.2 mL/min. In the post-menopausal group, it was 0.4 ± 0.1 mL/min (p < .05). It was found that during the hysteroscopy in the pre-menopausal patients, more fluid flows through the Fallopian tubes and at a higher flow rate.Impact statement What is already known on this subject? The complications during a hysteroscopy (HSC) are usually fluid-related and can result in adverse events such as a fluid overload, the dissemination of malignant cells, or electrolyte misbalance. Currently, there is a poor understanding of how HSC fluid behaviour impacts on the pathophysiology of these adverse procedure effects. What do the results of this study add? There have been no quantitative studies of the behaviour of fluid inside the uterine cavity during HSC, which means a quantification of fluid inflow and absorption is required. Our study adds a quantitative understanding of fluid behaviour during HSC. It shows increased rates of fluid passage, as well as fluid speed, into the peritoneal cavity in pre-menopausal patients. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Due to the higher rates of fluid passage and speed in pre-menstrual patients, caution regarding the complications during hysteroscopy and further studies are needed on the impact of different fluid distribution

    BRCA awareness and testing experience in the UK Jewish population:a qualitative study.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: 1 in 40 UK Jewish individuals carry a pathogenic variant in BRCA1/BRCA2. Traditional testing criteria miss half of carriers, and so population genetic testing is being piloted for Jewish people in England. There has been no qualitative research into the factors influencing BRCA awareness and testing experience in this group. This study aimed to explore these and inform improvements for the implementation of population genetic testing. METHODS: Qualitative study of UK Jewish adults who have undergone BRCA testing. We conducted one-to-one semistructured interviews via telephone or video call using a predefined topic guide, until sufficient information power was reached. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and interpreted using applied thematic analysis. RESULTS: 32 individuals were interviewed (28 carriers, 4 non-carriers). We interpreted five themes intersecting across six time points of the testing pathway: (1) individual differences regarding personal/family history of cancer, demographics and personal attitudes/approach; (2) healthcare professionals' support; (3) pathway access and integration; (4) nature of family/partner relationships; and (5) Jewish community factors. Testing was largely triggered by connecting information to a personal/family history of cancer. No participants reported decision regret, although there was huge variation in satisfaction. Suggestions were given around increasing UK Jewish community awareness, making information and support services personally relevant and proactive case management of carriers.CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to improve UK Jewish community BRCA awareness and to highlight personal relevance of testing for individuals without a personal/family history of cancer. Traditional testing criteria caused multiple issues regarding test access and experience. Carriers want information and support services tailored to their individual circumstances. </p

    Cost-effectiveness of unselected multigene germline and somatic genetic testing for epithelial ovarian cancer

    No full text
    Background : Parallel panel germline and somatic genetic testing of all patients with ovarian cancer (OC) can identify more pathogenic variants (PVs) that would benefit from PARP inhibitor (PARPi) therapy, and allow for precision prevention in unaffected relatives with PVs. In this study, we estimate the cost-effectiveness and population impact of parallel panel germline and somatic BRCA testing of all patients with OC incorporating PARPi therapy in the United Kingdom and the United States compared with clinical criteria/family history (FH)–based germline BRCA testing. We also evaluate the cost-effectiveness of multigene panel germline testing alone. Methods: Microsimulation cost-effectiveness modeling using data from 2,391 (UK: n=1,483; US: n=908) unselected, population-based patients with OC was used to compare lifetime costs and effects of panel germline and somatic BRCA testing of all OC cases (with PARPi therapy) (strategy A) versus clinical criteria/FH-based germline BRCA testing (strategy B). Unaffected relatives with germline BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 PVs identified through cascade testing underwent appropriate OC and breast cancer (BC) risk-reduction interventions. We also compared the cost-effectiveness of multigene panel germline testing alone (without PARPi therapy) versus strategy B. Unaffected relatives with PVs could undergo risk-reducing interventions. Lifetime horizon with payer/societal perspectives, along with probabilistic/one-way sensitivity analyses, are presented. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained were compared with £30,000/QALY (UK) and 100,000/QALY(US)thresholds.OCincidence,BCincidence,andpreventeddeathswereestimated.Results:Comparedwithclinicalcriteria/FHbasedBRCAtesting,BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1germlinetestingandBRCA1/BRCA2somatictestingofallpatientswithOCincorporatingPARPitherapyhadaUKICERof£51,175/QALY(payerperspective)and£50,202/QALY(societalperspective)andaUSICERof100,000/QALY (US) thresholds. OC incidence, BC incidence, and prevented deaths were estimated. Results: Compared with clinical criteria/FH-based BRCA testing, BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 germline testing and BRCA1/BRCA2 somatic testing of all patients with OC incorporating PARPi therapy had a UK ICER of £51,175/QALY (payer perspective) and £50,202/QALY (societal perspective) and a US ICER of 175,232/QALY (payer perspective) and 174,667/QALY(societalperspective),aboveUK/NICEandUScosteffectivenessthresholdsinthebasecase.However,strategyAbecomescosteffectiveifPARPicostsdecreaseby45174,667/QALY (societal perspective), above UK/NICE and US cost-effectiveness thresholds in the base case. However, strategy A becomes cost-effective if PARPi costs decrease by 45% to 46% or if overall survival with PARPi reaches a hazard ratio of 0.28. Unselected panel germline testing alone (without PARPi therapy) is cost-effective, with payer-perspective ICERs of £11,291/QALY or 68,808/QALY and societal-perspective ICERs of £6,923/QALY or $65,786/QALY. One year’s testing could prevent 209 UK BC/OC cases and 192 deaths, and 560 US BC/OC cases and 460 deaths. Conclusions: Unselected panel germline and somatic BRCA testing can become cost-effective, with a 45% to 46% reduction in PARPi costs. Regarding germline testing, unselected panel germline testing is highly cost-effective and should replace BRCA testing alone

    Cost-Effectiveness of Unselected Multigene Germline and Somatic Genetic Testing for Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

    No full text
    Background: Parallel panel germline and somatic genetic testing of all patients with ovarian cancer (OC) can identify more pathogenic variants (PVs) that would benefit from PARP inhibitor (PARPi) therapy, and allow for precision prevention in unaffected relatives with PVs. In this study, we estimate the cost-effectiveness and population impact of parallel panel germline and somatic BRCA testing of all patients with OC incorporating PARPi therapy in the United Kingdom and the United States compared with clinical criteria/family history (FH)–based germline BRCA testing. We also evaluate the cost-effectiveness of multigene panel germline testing alone. Methods: Microsimulation cost-effectiveness modeling using data from 2,391 (UK: n51,483; US: n5908) unselected, population-based patients with OC was used to compare lifetime costs and effects of panel germline and somatic BRCA testing of all OC cases (with PARPi therapy) (strategy A) versus clinical criteria/ FH-based germline BRCA testing (strategy B). Unaffected relatives with germline BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 PVs identified through cascade testing underwent appropriate OC and breast cancer (BC) risk-reduction interventions. We also compared the cost-effectiveness of multigene panel germline testing alone (without PARPi therapy) versus strategy B. Unaffected relatives with PVs could undergo risk-reducing interventions. Lifetime horizon with payer/societal perspectives, along with probabilistic/one-way sensitivity analyses, are presented. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained were compared with £30,000/QALY (UK) and 100,000/QALY(US)thresholds.OCincidence,BCincidence,andpreventeddeathswereestimated.Results:Comparedwithclinicalcriteria/FHbasedBRCAtesting,RCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1germlinetestingandBRCA1/BRCA2somatictestingofallpatientswithOCincorporatingPARPitherapyhadaUKICERof£51,175/QALY(payerperspective)and£50,202/QALY(societalperspective)andaUSICERof100,000/QALY (US) thresholds. OC incidence, BC incidence, and prevented deaths were estimated. Results: Compared with clinical criteria/FH-based BRCA testing, RCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 germline testing and BRCA1/BRCA2 somatic testing of all patients with OC incorporating PARPi therapy had a UK ICER of £51,175/QALY (payer perspective) and £50,202/QALY (societal perspective) and a US ICER of 175,232/QALY (payer perspective) and 174,667/QALY(societalperspective),aboveUK/NICEandUScosteffectivenessthresholdsinthebasecase.However,strategyAbecomescosteffectiveifPARPicostsdecreaseby45174,667/QALY (societal perspective), above UK/NICE and US cost-effectiveness thresholds in the base case. However, strategy A becomes cost-effective if PARPi costs decrease by 45% to 46% or if overall survival with PARPi reaches a hazard ratio of 0.28. Unselected panel germline testing alone (without PARPi therapy) is cost-effective, with payer-perspective ICERs of £11,291/QALY or 68,808/QALY and societal-perspective ICERs of £6,923/QALY or $65,786/QALY. One year’s testing could prevent 209 UK BC/OC cases and 192 deaths, and 560 US BC/OC cases and 460 deaths. Conclusions: Unselected panel germline and somatic BRCA testing can become cost-effective, with a 45% to 46% reduction in PARPicosts. Regarding germline testing, unselected panel germline testing is highly cost-effective and should replace BRCA testing alone
    corecore