Validation of the BOADICEA model in a prospective cohort of BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers.

BACKGROUND: No validation has been conducted for the BOADICEA multifactorial breast cancer risk prediction model specifically in BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant (PV) carriers to date. Here, we evaluated the performance of BOADICEA in predicting 5-year breast cancer risks in a prospective cohort of BRCA1/2 PV carriers ascertained through clinical genetic centres. METHODS: We evaluated the model calibration and discriminatory ability in the prospective TRANsIBCCS cohort study comprising 1614 BRCA1 and 1365 BRCA2 PV carriers (209 incident cases). Study participants had lifestyle, reproductive, hormonal, anthropometric risk factor information, a polygenic risk score based on 313 SNPs and family history information. RESULTS: The full multifactorial model considering family history together with all other risk factors was well calibrated overall (E/O=1.07, 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.24) and in quintiles of predicted risk. Discrimination was maximised when all risk factors were considered (Harrell's C-index=0.70, 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.74; area under the curve=0.79, 95% CI: 0.76 to 0.82). The model performance was similar when evaluated separately in BRCA1 or BRCA2 PV carriers. The full model identified 5.8%, 12.9% and 24.0% of BRCA1/2 PV carriers with 5-year breast cancer risks of <1.65%, <3% and <5%, respectively, risk thresholds commonly used for different management and risk-reduction options. CONCLUSION: BOADICEA may be used to aid personalised cancer risk management and decision-making for BRCA1 and BRCA2 PV carriers. It is implemented in the free-access CanRisk tool (https://www.canrisk.org/).

Joint ABS-UKCGG-CanGene-CanVar consensus regarding the use of CanRisk in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: The CanRisk tool, which operationalises the Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) is used by Clinical Geneticists, Genetic Counsellors, Breast Oncologists, Surgeons and Family History Nurses for breast cancer risk assessments both nationally and internationally. There are currently no guidelines with respect to the day-to-day clinical application of CanRisk and differing inputs to the model can result in different recommendations for practice. METHODS: To address this gap, the UK Cancer Genetics Group in collaboration with the Association of Breast Surgery and the CanGene-CanVar programme held a workshop on 16th of May 2023, with the aim of establishing best practice guidelines. RESULTS: Using a pre-workshop survey followed by structured discussion and in-meeting polling, we achieved consensus for UK best practice in use of CanRisk in making recommendations for breast cancer surveillance, eligibility for genetic testing and the input of available information to undertake an individualised risk assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst consensus recommendations were achieved, the meeting highlighted some of the barriers limiting the use of CanRisk in clinical practice and identified areas that require further work and collaboration with relevant national bodies and policy makers to incorporate wider use of CanRisk into routine breast cancer risk assessments.

Breast cancer risk assessment for prescription of Menopausal Hormone Therapy in women who have a family history of breast cancer.

Background Menopausal Hormone Therapy (MHT) can alleviate menopausal symptoms but is associated with increased risk of breast cancer (BC). MHT prescription should be preceded by individualised risk/benefit evaluation; however, data outlining the impact of family history alongside different MHT therapeutic approaches are lacking. Aim To quantify the risks associated with MHT use in women with varying BC family histories of i) developing and ii) dying from BC. Design and setting An epidemiological modelling study (UK women). Method We used i) background risks of BC by age and family history, ii) relative risks for BC associated with MHT use, and iii) 10-year BC-specific net mortality rates to model the risk of developing and dying from BC between the ages of 50 and 80 in women with four different BC family history profiles: 'average', 'modest', 'intermediate', and 'strong'. Results For a woman of 'average' family history taking no MHT, the cumulative BC risk (age 50-80) is 9.8%, and the risk of dying from the BC is 1.7%. Five years' exposure to combined-cyclical MHT (age 50-55) increases these risks to 11.0% and 1.8%, respectively. For a woman with a 'strong' family history taking no MHT, the cumulative BC risk is 19.6%, and the risk of dying is 3.2%. With 5 years of MHT (age 50-55), this increases to 22.4% and 3.5%. Conclusion Both family history and MHT are associated with increased risk of BC. Estimates of the risks associated with MHT for women with different family histories can support decision-making around MHT prescription.

Extent of investigation and management of cases of 'unexplained' mismatch repair deficiency (u-dMMR): a UK Cancer Genetics Group consensus.

BACKGROUND: Mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) is a characteristic feature of cancers linked to Lynch syndrome. However, in most cases, it results from sporadic somatic events rather than hereditary factors. The term 'Lynch-like syndrome' (LLS) has been used to guide colorectal cancer surveillance for relatives of individuals with a dMMR tumour when somatic and germline genomic testing is uninformative. As the assessment of mismatch repair through immunohistochemistry and/or microsatellite instability is increasingly applied across various tumour types for treatment planning, dMMR is increasingly detected in tumours where suspicion of hereditary aetiology is low. Our objective was to establish current practices and develop national guidance for investigating, and managing relatives of, patients with cancers demonstrating unexplained dMMR. METHODS: This was achieved through a virtual consensus meeting involving key stakeholders from the UK, through premeeting surveys, structured discussions and in-meeting polling to formulate best practice guidance. RESULTS: We identified variability in the availability of diagnostic technologies across specialist centres. It was agreed that equitable access to baseline testing is required, acknowledging the need for a pragmatic approach to investigating dMMR cancers not traditionally associated with Lynch syndrome. Factors such as family history, age, tumour type, protein loss pattern and extent of the investigation were deemed crucial in guiding family management. The term 'unexplained dMMR' was recommended over LLS. CONCLUSION: Decisions regarding investigations and future cancer risk management in patients and relatives should be nuanced, considering factors like clinical suspicion of hereditary predisposition to allocate limited resources efficiently and avoid unnecessary investigations in low-suspicion families.

EMQN best practice guidelines for genetic testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) is a genetic condition associated with increased risk of cancers. The past decade has brought about significant changes to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) diagnostic testing with new treatments, testing methods and strategies, and evolving information on genetic associations. These best practice guidelines have been produced to assist clinical laboratories in effectively addressing the complexities of HBOC testing, while taking into account advancements since the last guidelines were published in 2007. These guidelines summarise cancer risk data from recent studies for the most commonly tested high and moderate risk HBOC genes for laboratories to refer to as a guide. Furthermore, recommendations are provided for somatic and germline testing services with regards to clinical referral, laboratory analyses, variant interpretation, and reporting. The guidelines present recommendations where 'must' is assigned to advocate that the recommendation is essential; and 'should' is assigned to advocate that the recommendation is highly advised but may not be universally applicable. Recommendations are presented in the form of shaded italicised statements throughout the document, and in the form of a table in supplementary materials (Table S4). Finally, for the purposes of encouraging standardisation and aiding implementation of recommendations, example report wording covering the essential points to be included is provided for the most common HBOC referral and reporting scenarios. These guidelines are aimed primarily at genomic scientists working in diagnostic testing laboratories.

Cancer Precision-Prevention trial of Metformin in adults with Li Fraumeni syndrome (MILI) undergoing yearly MRI surveillance: a randomised controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is a rare autosomal dominant disease caused by inherited or de novo germline pathogenic variants in TP53. Individuals with LFS have a 70-100% lifetime risk of developing cancer. The current standard of care involves annual surveillance with whole-body and brain MRI (WB-MRI) and clinical review; however, there are no chemoprevention agents licensed for individuals with LFS. Preclinical studies in LFS murine models show that the anti-diabetic drug metformin is chemopreventive and, in a pilot intervention trial, short-term use of metformin was well-tolerated in adults with LFS. However, metformin's mechanism of anticancer activity in this context is unclear. METHODS: Metformin in adults with Li-Fraumeni syndrome (MILI) is a Precision-Prevention phase II open-labelled unblinded randomised clinical trial in which 224 adults aged ≥ 16 years with LFS are randomised 1:1 to oral metformin (up to 2 mg daily) plus annual MRI surveillance or annual MRI surveillance alone for up to 5 years. The primary endpoint is to compare cumulative cancer-free survival up to 5 years (60 months) from randomisation between the intervention (metformin) and control (no metformin) arms. Secondary endpoints include a comparison of cumulative tumour-free survival at 5 years, overall survival at 5 years and clinical characteristics of emerging cancers between trial arms. Safety, toxicity and acceptability of metformin; impact of metformin on quality of life; and impact of baseline lifestyle risk factors on cancer incidence will be assessed. Exploratory end-points will evaluate the mechanism of action of metformin as a cancer preventative, identify biomarkers of response or carcinogenesis and assess WB-MRI performance as a diagnostic tool for detecting cancers in participants with LFS by assessing yield and diagnostic accuracy of WB-MRI. DISCUSSION: Alongside a parallel MILI study being conducted by collaborators at the National Cancer Institute (NCI), MILI is the first prevention trial to be conducted in this high-risk group. The MILI study provides a unique opportunity to evaluate the efficacy of metformin as a chemopreventive alongside exploring its mechanism of anticancer action and the biological process of mutated P53-driven tumourigenesis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN16699730. Registered on 28 November 2022. URL: https://www.isrctn.com/ EudraCT/CTIS number 2022-000165-41.

Co-design of patient information leaflets for germline predisposition to cancer: recommendations for clinical practice from the UK Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG), Cancer Research UK (CRUK) funded CanGene-CanVar Programme and the Association of Genetic Nurse Counsellors (AGNC).

BACKGROUND: Testing for germline pathogenic variants (GPVs) in cancer predisposition genes is increasingly offered as part of routine care for patients with cancer. This is often urgent in oncology clinics due to potential implications on treatment and surgical decisions. This also allows identification of family members who should be offered predictive genetic testing. In the UK, it is common practice for healthcare professionals to provide a patient information leaflet (PIL) at point of care for diagnostic genetic testing in patients with cancer, after results disclosure when a GPV is identified, and for predictive testing of at-risk relatives. Services usually create their own PIL, resulting in duplication of effort and wide variability regarding format, content, signposting and patient input in co-design and evaluation. METHODS: Representatives from UK Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG), Cancer Research UK (CRUK) funded CanGene-CanVar programme and Association of Genetic Nurse Counsellors (AGNC) held a 2-day meeting with the aim of making recommendations for clinical practice regarding co-design of PIL for germline cancer susceptibility genetic testing. Lynch syndrome and haematological malignancies were chosen as exemplar conditions. RESULTS: Meeting participants included patient representatives including as co-chair, multidisciplinary clinicians and other experts from across the UK. High-level consensus for UK recommendations for clinical practice was reached on several aspects of PIL using digital polling, including that PIL should be offered, accessible, co-designed and evaluated with patients. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations from the meeting are likely to be applicable for PIL co-design for a wide range of germline genetic testing scenarios.

Recommendations for laboratory workflow that better support centralised amalgamation of genomic variant data: findings from CanVIG-UK national molecular laboratory survey.

BACKGROUND: National and international amalgamation of genomic data offers opportunity for research and audit, including analyses enabling improved classification of variants of uncertain significance. Review of individual-level data from National Health Service (NHS) testing of cancer susceptibility genes (2002-2023) submitted to the National Disease Registration Service revealed heterogeneity across participating laboratories regarding (1) the structure, quality and completeness of submitted data, and (2) the ease with which that data could be assembled locally for submission. METHODS: In May 2023, we undertook a closed online survey of 51 clinical scientists who provided consensus responses representing all 17 of 17 NHS molecular genetic laboratories in England and Wales which undertake NHS diagnostic analyses of cancer susceptibility genes. The survey included 18 questions relating to 'next-generation sequencing workflow' (11), 'variant classification' (3) and 'phenotypical context' (4). RESULTS: Widely differing processes were reported for transfer of variant data into their local LIMS (Laboratory Information Management System), for the formatting in which the variants are stored in the LIMS and which classes of variants are retained in the local LIMS. Differing local provisions and workflow for variant classifications were also reported, including the resources provided and the mechanisms by which classifications are stored. CONCLUSION: The survey responses illustrate heterogeneous laboratory workflow for preparation of genomic variant data from local LIMS for centralised submission. Workflow is often labour-intensive and inefficient, involving multiple manual steps which introduce opportunities for error. These survey findings and adoption of the concomitant recommendations may support improvement in laboratory dataflows, better facilitating submission of data for central amalgamation.

Risk-stratified faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for urgent colonoscopy in Lynch syndrome during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome is a hereditary cancer disease resulting in an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Herein, findings are reported from an emergency clinical service implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic utilizing faecal immunochemical testing ('FIT') in Lynch syndrome patients to prioritize colonoscopy while endoscopy services were limited. METHODS: An emergency service protocol was designed to improve colonoscopic surveillance access throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in England for people with Lynch syndrome when services were extremely restricted (1 March 2020 to 31 March 2021) and promoted by the English National Health Service. Requests for faecal immunochemical testing from participating centres were sent to the National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening South of England Hub and a faecal immunochemical testing kit, faecal immunochemical testing instructions, paper-based survey, and pre-paid return envelope were sent to patients. Reports with faecal haemoglobin results were returned electronically for clinical action. Risk stratification for colonoscopy was as follows: faecal haemoglobin less than 10 µg of haemoglobin/g of faeces (µg/g)-scheduled within 6-12 weeks; and faecal haemoglobin greater than or equal to 10 µg/g-triaged via an urgent suspected cancer clinical pathway. Primary outcomes of interest included the identification of highest-risk Lynch syndrome patients and determining the impact of faecal immunochemical testing in risk-stratified colonoscopic surveillance. RESULTS: Fifteen centres participated from June 2020 to March 2021. Uptake was 68.8 per cent amongst 558 patients invited. For 339 eligible participants analysed, 279 (82.3 per cent) had faecal haemoglobin less than 10 µg/g and 60 (17.7 per cent) had faecal haemoglobin greater than or equal to 10 µg/g. In the latter group, the diagnostic accuracy of faecal immunochemical testing was 65.9 per cent and escalation to colonoscopy was facilitated (median 49 versus 122 days, χ2 = 0.0003, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Faecal immunochemical testing demonstrated clinical value for Lynch syndrome patients requiring colorectal cancer surveillance during the pandemic in this descriptive report of an emergency COVID-19 response service. Further longitudinal investigation on faecal immunochemical testing efficacy in Lynch syndrome is warranted and will be examined under the 'FIT for Lynch' study (ISRCTN15740250).

'A good decision is the one that feels right for me': Codesign with patients to inform theoretical underpinning of a decision aid website.

INTRODUCTION: Patient decision aids (PtDA) complement shared decision-making with healthcare professionals and improve decision quality. However, PtDA often lack theoretical underpinning. We are codesigning a PtDA to help people with increased genetic cancer risks manage choices. The aim of an innovative workshop described here was to engage with the people who will use the PtDA regarding the theoretical underpinning and logic model outlining our hypothesis of how the PtDA would lead to more informed decision-making. METHODS: Short presentations about psychological and behavioural theories by an expert were interspersed with facilitated, small-group discussions led by patients. Patients were asked what is important to them when they make health decisions, what theoretical constructs are most meaningful and how this should be applied to codesign of a PtDA. An artist created a visual summary. Notes from patient discussions and the artwork were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: The overarching theme was: It's personal. Contextual factors important for decision-making were varied and changed over time. There was no one 'best fit' theory to target support needs in a PtDA, suggesting an inductive, flexible framework approach to programme theory would be most effective. The PtDA logic model was revised based on patient feedback. CONCLUSION: Meaningful codesign of PtDA including discussions about the theoretical mechanisms through which they support decision-making has the potential to lead to improved patient care through understanding the intricately personal nature of health decisions, and tailoring content and format for holistic care. PATIENT CONTRIBUTION: Patients with lived experience were involved in codesign and coproduction of this workshop and analysis as partners and coauthors. Patient discussions were the primary data source. Facilitators provided a semi-structured guide, but they did not influence the patient discussions or provide clinical advice. The premise of this workshop was to prioritise the importance of patient lived experience: to listen, learn, then reflect together to understand and propose ideas to improve patient care through codesign of a PtDA.

Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and surveillance of BAP1 tumour predisposition syndrome.

BRCA1-associated protein-1 (BAP1) is a recognised tumour suppressor gene. Germline BAP1 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants are associated with predisposition to multiple tumours, including uveal melanoma, malignant pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma, renal cell carcinoma and specific non-malignant neoplasms of the skin, as part of the autosomal dominant BAP1-tumour predisposition syndrome. The overall lifetime risk for BAP1 carriers to develop at least one BAP1-associated tumour is up to 85%, although due to ascertainment bias, current estimates of risk are likely to be overestimated. As for many rare cancer predisposition syndromes, there is limited scientific evidence to support the utility of surveillance and, therefore, management recommendations for BAP1 carriers are based on expert opinion. To date, European recommendations for BAP1 carriers have not been published but are necessary due to the emerging phenotype of this recently described syndrome and increased identification of BAP1 carriers via large gene panels or tumour sequencing. To address this, the Clinical Guideline Working Group of the CanGene-CanVar project in the United Kingdom invited European collaborators to collaborate to develop guidelines to harmonize surveillance programmes within Europe. Recommendations with respect to BAP1 testing and surveillance were achieved following literature review and Delphi survey completed by a core group and an extended expert group of 34 European specialists including Geneticists, Ophthalmologists, Oncologists, Dermatologists and Pathologists. It is recognised that these largely evidence-based but pragmatic recommendations will evolve over time as further data from research collaborations informs the phenotypic spectrum and surveillance outcomes.

Management of individuals with germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in CHEK2: A clinical practice resource of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).

PURPOSE: Although the role of CHEK2 germline pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition is well known, resources for managing CHEK2 heterozygotes in clinical practice are limited. METHODS: An international workgroup developed guidance on clinical management of CHEK2 heterozygotes informed by peer-reviewed publications from PubMed. RESULTS: Although CHEK2 is considered a moderate penetrance gene, cancer risks may be considered as a continuous variable, which are influenced by family history and other modifiers. Consequently, early cancer detection and prevention for CHEK2 heterozygotes should be guided by personalized risk estimates. Such estimates may result in both downgrading lifetime breast cancer risks to those similar to the general population or upgrading lifetime risk to a level at which CHEK2 heterozygotes are offered high-risk breast surveillance according to country-specific guidelines. Risk-reducing mastectomy should be guided by personalized risk estimates and shared decision making. Colorectal and prostate cancer surveillance should be considered based on assessment of family history. For CHEK2 heterozygotes who develop cancer, no specific targeted medical treatment is recommended at this time. CONCLUSION: Systematic prospective data collection is needed to establish the spectrum of CHEK2-associated cancer risks and to determine yet-unanswered questions, such as the outcomes of surveillance, response to cancer treatment, and survival after cancer diagnosis.

Utility of polygenic risk scores in UK cancer screening: a modelling analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is proposed that, through restriction to individuals delineated as high risk, polygenic risk scores (PRSs) might enable more efficient targeting of existing cancer screening programmes and enable extension into new age ranges and disease types. To address this proposition, we present an overview of the performance of PRS tools (ie, models and sets of single nucleotide polymorphisms) alongside harms and benefits of PRS-stratified cancer screening for eight example cancers (breast, prostate, colorectal, pancreas, ovary, kidney, lung, and testicular cancer). METHODS: For this modelling analysis, we used age-stratified cancer incidences for the UK population from the National Cancer Registration Dataset (2016-18) and published estimates of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for current, future, and optimised PRS for each of the eight cancer types. For each of five PRS-defined high-risk quantiles (ie, the top 50%, 20%, 10%, 5%, and 1%) and according to each of the three PRS tools (ie, current, future, and optimised) for the eight cancers, we calculated the relative proportion of cancers arising, the odds ratios of a cancer arising compared with the UK population average, and the lifetime cancer risk. We examined maximal attainable rates of cancer detection by age stratum from combining PRS-based stratification with cancer screening tools and modelled the maximal impact on cancer-specific survival of hypothetical new UK programmes of PRS-stratified screening. FINDINGS: The PRS-defined high-risk quintile (20%) of the population was estimated to capture 37% of breast cancer cases, 46% of prostate cancer cases, 34% of colorectal cancer cases, 29% of pancreatic cancer cases, 26% of ovarian cancer cases, 22% of renal cancer cases, 26% of lung cancer cases, and 47% of testicular cancer cases. Extending UK screening programmes to a PRS-defined high-risk quintile including people aged 40-49 years for breast cancer, 50-59 years for colorectal cancer, and 60-69 years for prostate cancer has the potential to avert, respectively, a maximum of 102, 188, and 158 deaths annually. Unstratified screening of the full population aged 48-49 years for breast cancer, 58-59 years for colorectal cancer, and 68-69 years for prostate cancer would use equivalent resources and avert, respectively, an estimated maximum of 80, 155, and 95 deaths annually. These maximal modelled numbers will be substantially attenuated by incomplete population uptake of PRS profiling and cancer screening, interval cancers, non-European ancestry, and other factors. INTERPRETATION: Under favourable assumptions, our modelling suggests modest potential efficiency gain in cancer case detection and deaths averted for hypothetical new PRS-stratified screening programmes for breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer. Restriction of screening to high-risk quantiles means many or most incident cancers will arise in those assigned as being low-risk. To quantify real-world clinical impact, costs, and harms, UK-specific cluster-randomised trials are required. FUNDING: The Wellcome Trust.

PREDICT validity for prognosis of breast cancer patients with pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants.

We assessed the PREDICT v 2.2 for prognosis of breast cancer patients with pathogenic germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants, using follow-up data from 5453 BRCA1/2 carriers from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA) and the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). PREDICT for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer had modest discrimination for BRCA1 carrier patients overall (Gönen & Heller unbiased concordance 0.65 in CIMBA, 0.64 in BCAC), but it distinguished clearly the high-mortality group from lower risk categories. In an analysis of low to high risk categories by PREDICT score percentiles, the observed mortality was consistently lower than the expected mortality, but the confidence intervals always included the calibration slope. Altogether, our results encourage the use of the PREDICT ER-negative model in management of breast cancer patients with germline BRCA1 variants. For the PREDICT ER-positive model, the discrimination was slightly lower in BRCA2 variant carriers (concordance 0.60 in CIMBA, 0.65 in BCAC). Especially, inclusion of the tumor grade distorted the prognostic estimates. The breast cancer mortality of BRCA2 carriers was underestimated at the low end of the PREDICT score distribution, whereas at the high end, the mortality was overestimated. These data suggest that BRCA2 status should also be taken into consideration with tumor characteristics, when estimating the prognosis of ER-positive breast cancer patients.

Development of an international glossary for clinical guidelines collaboration.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are often created through collaboration among organizations. The use of inconsistent terminology may cause poor communication and delays. This study aimed to develop a glossary of terms related to collaboration in guideline development. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A literature review of collaborative guidelines was performed to develop an initial list of terms related to guideline collaboration. The list of terms was presented to the members of the Guideline International Network Guidelines Collaboration Working Group, who provided presumptive definitions for each term and proposed additional terms to be included. The revised list was subsequently reviewed by an international, multidisciplinary panel of expert stakeholders. Recommendations received during this pre-Delphi review were implemented to augment an initial draft glossary. The glossary was then critically evaluated and refined through two rounds of Delphi surveys and a virtual consensus meeting with all panel members as Delphi participants. RESULTS: Forty-nine experts participated in the pre-Delphi survey, and 44 participated in the two-round Delphi process. Consensus was reached for 37 terms and definitions. CONCLUSION: Uptake and utilization of this guideline collaboration glossary by key organizations and stakeholder groups may facilitate collaboration among guideline-producing organizations by improving communication, minimizing conflicts, and increasing guideline development efficiency.

Medication work among nonagenarians: a qualitative study of the Newcastle 85+ cohort participants at 97 years old.

BACKGROUND: People aged ≥85 years are the fastest growing section of our population across most high-income countries. A majority live with multiple long-term conditions and frailty, but there is limited understanding of how the associated polypharmacy is experienced by this group. AIM: To explore the experiences of medication management among nonagenarians and the implications for primary care practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative analysis of medication work in nonagenarians from a purposive sample of survivors of the Newcastle 85+ study (a longitudinal cohort study). METHOD: Semi-structured interviews (n = 20) were conducted, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using a thematic approach. RESULTS: In most cases, although considerable work is associated with self-management of medication use, it is generally not experienced as problematic by the older people themselves. Taking medications is habitualised into everyday routines and practices, and is experienced in much the same way as other activities of daily living. For some, the work associated with medications has been relinquished (either partially or wholly) to others, minimising the burden experienced by the individual. Exceptions to this were found when disruptions to these steady states occurred, for example, following a new medical diagnosis with associated medication changes or a major life event. CONCLUSION: This study has shown a high level of acceptance of the work associated with medications among this group and trust in the prescribers to provide the most appropriate care. Medicines optimisation should build on this trust and be presented as personalised, evidence-based care.

Germline predisposition to haematological malignancies: Best practice consensus guidelines from the UK Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG), CanGene-CanVar and the NHS England Haematological Oncology Working Group.

The implementation of whole genome sequencing and large somatic gene panels in haematological malignancies is identifying an increasing number of individuals with either potential or confirmed germline predisposition to haematological malignancy. There are currently no national or international best practice guidelines with respect to management of carriers of such variants or of their at-risk relatives. To address this gap, the UK Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG), CanGene-CanVar and the NHS England Haematological Oncology Working Group held a workshop over two days on 28-29th April 2022, with the aim of establishing consensus guidelines on relevant clinical and laboratory pathways. The workshop focussed on the management of disease-causing germline variation in the following genes: DDX41, CEBPA, RUNX1, ANKRD26, ETV6, GATA2. Using a pre-workshop survey followed by structured discussion and in-meeting polling, we achieved consensus for UK best practice in several areas. In particular, high consensus was achieved on issues regarding standardised reporting, variant classification, multidisciplinary team working and patient support. The best practice recommendations from this meeting may be applicable to an expanding number of other genes in this setting.