Utility of Expedited Hereditary Cancer Testing in the Surgical Management of Patients with a New Breast Cancer Diagnosis
Knowledge of a germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant (PV) may inform breast cancer management. BRCA1/2 PV often impact surgical decisions, but data for multi-gene panel testing are lacking. Expedited genetic testing reduces turn-around times based on request for treatment-related decision making. This report aims to describe the clinical utility of expedited multi-gene panel testing for patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer.
Clinical and demographic information were reviewed for patients with newly diagnosed female breast cancer undergoing expedited panel testing between 2013 and 2017. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines (NCCN, version 1.2018) were evaluated in terms of published management recommendations for the genes in which PVs were identified.
The overall PV yield was 9.5% (678/7127) for women undergoing expedited panel testing, with 700 PVs identified among 678 women. PVs were identified in genes other than BRCA1/2 in 55.9% (391/700) of cases. The NCCN guidelines recommend management for the genes in which 96.6% (676/700) of PVs are identified. The NCCN guidelines also recommend risk-reducing mastectomy for 46.0% (322/700) of PVs identified. An additional 45.6% (319/700) of PVs were identified in genes for which NCCN recommends mastectomy based on family history. In addition, 49.9% (349/700) of PVs were in genes with NCCN guidelines recommending prophylactic surgery for tissues other than breast.
A majority of the patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer were candidates for surgical intervention according to the NCCN guidelines, and half of these patients would have been missed if only BRCA1/2 testing had been ordered. Expedited multi-gene hereditary cancer panel testing should be considered as a first-line approach to provide comprehensive information for breast cancer management.
- 5.Chiba A, Hoskin TL, Hallberg EJ, et al. Impact that timing of genetic mutation diagnosis has on surgical decision making and outcome for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers with breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23:3232–8. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5328-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 11.Murphy AE, Hussain L, Ho C, et al. Preoperative panel testing for hereditary cancer syndromes does not significantly impact time to surgery for newly diagnosed breast cancer patients compared with BRCA1/2 testing. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:3055–9. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5957-5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Kapoor NS, Curcio LD, Blakemore CA, et al. Multigene panel testing detects equal rates of pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutations and has a higher diagnostic yield compared to limited BRCA1/2 analysis alone in patients at risk for hereditary breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:3282–8. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4754-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Ricker C, Culver JO, Lowstuter K, et al. Increased yield of actionable mutations using multi-gene panels to assess hereditary cancer susceptibility in an ethnically diverse clinical cohort. Cancer Genet. 2016;209:130–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cancergen.2015.12.013.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 16.Yadav S, Reeves A, Campian S, Sufka A, Zakalik D. Preoperative genetic testing impacts surgical decision making in BRCA mutation carriers with breast cancer: a retrospective cohort analysis. Hered Cancer Clin Pract. 2017;15:11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13053-017-0071-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 18.The American Society of Breast Surgeons Board of Directors. Consensus Guideline on Hereditary Genetic Testing for Patients With and Without Breast Cancer. March 2017. Retrieved 12 March 2018 at https://www.breastsurgeons.org/new_layout/about/statements/PDF_Statements/BRCA_Testing.pdf.
- 21.Norum J, Grindedal EM, Heramb C, et al. BRCA mutation carrier detection. a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the traditional family history approach and the testing of all patients with breast cancer. ESMO Open. 2018;3:e000328. https://doi.org/10.1136/esmoopen-2018-000328.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 23.Richards S, Aziz N, Bale S, et al. Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Genet Med Off J Am Coll Med Genet. 2015;17:405–24. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2015.30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Sequence Variant Nomenclature. Retrieved 18 April 2018 at http://varnomen.hgvs.org/.
- 28.NCCN Guidelines. Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal. Version 3.2017. Retrieved 18 October 2017 at https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/genetics_colon.pdf.
- 37.NCCN Guidelines. Gastric Cancer. Version 5.2017. Retrieved 18 October 2017 at https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/genetics_colon.pdf.