Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Biomed Res Int ; 2020: 3289023, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32090079

ABSTRACT

The use of genetic testing to identify individuals with hereditary cancer syndromes has been widely adopted by clinicians for management of inherited cancer risk. The objective of this study was to develop and validate a 34-gene inherited cancer predisposition panel using targeted capture-based next-generation sequencing (NGS). The panel incorporates genes underlying well-characterized cancer syndromes, such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2), along with more recently discovered genes associated with increased cancer risk. We performed a validation study on 133 unique specimens, including 33 with known variant status; known variants included single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and small insertions and deletions (Indels), as well as copy-number variants (CNVs). The analytical validation study achieved 100% sensitivity and specificity for SNVs and small Indels, with 100% sensitivity and 98.0% specificity for CNVs using in-house developed CNV flagging algorithm. We employed a microarray comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) method for all specimens that the algorithm flags as CNV-positive for confirmation. In combination with aCGH confirmation, CNV detection specificity improved to 100%. We additionally report results of the first 500 consecutive specimens submitted for clinical testing with the 34-gene panel, identifying 53 deleterious variants in 13 genes in 49 individuals. Half of the detected pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants were found in BRCA1 (23%), BRCA2 (23%), or the Lynch syndrome-associated genes PMS2 (4%) and MLH1 (2%). The other half were detected in 9 other genes: MUTYH (17%), CHEK2 (15%), ATM (4%), PALB2 (4%), BARD1 (2%), CDH1 (2%), CDKN2A (2%), RAD51C (2%), and RET (2%). Our validation studies and initial clinical data demonstrate that a 34-gene inherited cancer predisposition panel can provide clinically significant information for cancer risk assessment.


Subject(s)
Genes, Neoplasm , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing , Inheritance Patterns/genetics , DNA Copy Number Variations/genetics , Humans , INDEL Mutation/genetics , Reproducibility of Results
2.
J Community Genet ; 9(3): 233-241, 2018 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29151150

ABSTRACT

In cancer genetics, technological advances (next generation sequencing) and the expansion of genetic test options have resulted in lowered costs and increased access to genetic testing. Despite this, the majority of patients utilizing cancer genetics services lack diversity of gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Through retrospective chart review, we compared outcomes of cancer genetics consultations at a tertiary cancer center and a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) (58 tertiary and 23 FQHC patients) from 2013 to 2015. The two groups differed in race, ethnicity, use of translator services, and type of insurance coverage. There were also significant differences in completeness of family history information, with more missing information about relatives in the FQHC group. In spite of these differences, genetic testing rates among those offered testing were comparable across the two groups with 74% of tertiary patients and 60% of FQHC patients completing testing. Implementation of community-based cancer genetics outreach clinics represents an opportunity to improve access to genetic counseling services, but more research is needed to develop effective counseling models for diverse patient populations.

3.
Genet Med ; 19(7): 787-795, 2017 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28125075

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Implementing cancer precision medicine in the clinic requires assessing the therapeutic relevance of genomic alterations. A main challenge is the systematic interpretation of whole-exome sequencing (WES) data for clinical care. METHODS: One hundred sixty-five adults with metastatic colorectal and lung adenocarcinomas were prospectively enrolled in the CanSeq study. WES was performed on DNA extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor biopsy samples and matched blood samples. Somatic and germ-line alterations were ranked according to therapeutic or clinical relevance. Results were interpreted using an integrated somatic and germ-line framework and returned in accordance with patient preferences. RESULTS: At the time of this analysis, WES had been performed and results returned to the clinical team for 165 participants. Of 768 curated somatic alterations, only 31% were associated with clinical evidence and 69% with preclinical or inferential evidence. Of 806 curated germ-line variants, 5% were clinically relevant and 56% were classified as variants of unknown significance. The variant review and decision-making processes were effective when the process was changed from that of a Molecular Tumor Board to a protocol-based approach. CONCLUSION: The development of novel interpretive and decision-support tools that draw from scientific and clinical evidence will be crucial for the success of cancer precision medicine in WES studies.Genet Med advance online publication 26 January 2017.


Subject(s)
Exome Sequencing/methods , Exome/genetics , Precision Medicine/methods , Adenocarcinoma/genetics , Adenocarcinoma of Lung , Adult , Colorectal Neoplasms/genetics , Databases, Genetic , Genomics/methods , Germ-Line Mutation/genetics , High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing/methods , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Mutation/genetics , Prospective Studies , Sequence Analysis, DNA/methods
4.
Blood ; 127(21): 2598-606, 2016 05 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26903547

ABSTRACT

Familial aggregation of Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) cases, and the clustering of B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders among first-degree relatives of WM patients, has been reported. Nevertheless, the possible contribution of inherited susceptibility to familial WM remains unrevealed. We performed whole exome sequencing on germ line DNA obtained from 4 family members in which coinheritance for WM was documented in 3 of them, and screened additional independent 246 cases by using gene-specific mutation sequencing. Among the shared germ line variants, LAPTM5(c403t) and HCLS1(g496a) were the most recurrent, being present in 3/3 affected members of the index family, detected in 8% of the unrelated familial cases, and present in 0.5% of the nonfamilial cases and in <0.05 of a control population. LAPTM5 and HCLS1 appeared as relevant WM candidate genes that characterized familial WM individuals and were also functionally relevant to the tumor clone. These findings highlight potentially novel contributors for the genetic predisposition to familial WM and indicate that LAPTM5(c403t) and HCLS1(g496a) may represent predisposition alleles in patients with familial WM.


Subject(s)
Blood Proteins/genetics , Exome , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Germ-Line Mutation , Membrane Proteins/genetics , Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia/genetics , Adaptor Proteins, Signal Transducing , Family , Female , High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing , Humans , Male
6.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol ; 12(6): 1046-50, 2014 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24362051

ABSTRACT

Survivors of childhood cancers are at increased risk of developing secondary gastrointestinal cancers, including colorectal cancer, later in life, possibly from exposure to abdominopelvic radiotherapy and/or alkylating chemotherapy. Profuse gastrointestinal polyposis is associated with rare, inherited colorectal cancer predisposition syndromes, most commonly caused by mutations in the adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) or mutY homolog (MUTYH) genes. We describe 5 patients who developed gastrointestinal polyposis many years after radiotherapy and chemotherapy for a childhood cancer. Genetic analysis of all 5 subjects did not identify pathogenic germline mutations in APC or MUTYH. Chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy therefore might cause gastrointestinal polyposis in some patients by undiscovered mechanisms.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Intestinal Polyposis/chemically induced , Neoplasms/therapy , Radiotherapy/adverse effects , Adenomatous Polyposis Coli Protein/genetics , Adolescent , Adult , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , DNA Glycosylases/genetics , Female , Genotype , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Young Adult
7.
Genet Test ; 6(1): 31-8, 2002.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12180074

ABSTRACT

Newborn screening programs collectively administer the largest genetic testing initiative in the United States. The redress of grievances is an important mechanism for consumers to provide input into clinical and public health programs. In this study, we evaluated mechanisms for addressing consumer grievances in newborn screening programs. To do this, we surveyed all 50 state plus the District of Columbia newborn screening programs by questionnaire regarding protocols for receipt and redress of problems reported by parents of newborns and ascertained the existence and nature of complaints and how complaints were documented and addressed. Pertinent state and federal legislation and regulation were also reviewed. Six of 49 newborn screening programs reported having formal policies for handling consumer grievances. Four states reported having pertinent legislation or regulation. Thirty-eight of 49 states reported having received complaints from 1993 to 1995. Thirteen of 49 newborn screening programs reported that they actively seek feedback from consumers. Consumer grievances ranged from minor complaints to potentially life-threatening concerns. In general, complaints are managed on an ad hoc basis; formal policies are typically lacking. As newborn screening programs affect a vast number of Americans, a proactive and comprehensive approach, including solicitation of consumer feedback, could benefit both newborn screening programs and the public served by them.


Subject(s)
Consumer Behavior , Genetic Testing , Community Participation , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Public Opinion , Public Policy , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States
8.
J Clin Oncol ; 20(11): 2701-12, 2002 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12039933

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To compare genetic test results for deleterious mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2 with estimated probabilities of carrying such mutations; to assess sensitivity of genetic testing; and to assess the relevance of other susceptibility genes in familial breast and ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data analyzed were from six high-risk genetic counseling clinics and concern individuals from families for which at least one member was tested for mutations at BRCA1 and BRCA2. Predictions of genetic predisposition to breast and ovarian cancer for 301 individuals were made using BRCAPRO, a statistical model and software using Mendelian genetics and Bayesian updating. Model predictions were compared with the results of genetic testing. RESULTS: Among the test individuals, 126 were Ashkenazi Jewish, three were male subjects, 243 had breast cancer, 49 had ovarian cancer, 34 were unaffected, and 139 tested positive for BRCA1 mutations and 29 for BRCA2 mutations. BRCAPRO performed well: for the 150 probands with the smallest BRCAPRO carrier probabilities (average, 29.0%), the proportion testing positive was 32.7%; for the 151 probands with the largest carrier probabilities (average, 95.2%), 78.8% tested positive. Genetic testing sensitivity was estimated to be at least 85%, with false-negatives including mutations of susceptibility genes heretofore unknown. CONCLUSION: BRCAPRO is an accurate counseling tool for determining the probability of carrying mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2. Genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 is highly sensitive, missing an estimated 15% of mutations. In the populations studied, breast cancer susceptibility genes other than BRCA1 and BRCA2 either do not exist, are rare, or are associated with low disease penetrance.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Decision Making, Computer-Assisted , Genes, BRCA1 , Genes, BRCA2 , Genetic Testing/methods , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Breast Neoplasms, Male/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms, Male/genetics , Breast Neoplasms, Male/prevention & control , Female , Genetic Carrier Screening , Genetic Predisposition to Disease/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Ovarian Neoplasms/epidemiology , Ovarian Neoplasms/prevention & control , Pedigree , Prevalence , Probability , Reproducibility of Results , Retrospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...