Utility of Expedited Hereditary Cancer Testing in the Surgical Management of Patients with a New Breast Cancer Diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.

Barriers to and motivations for physician referral of patients to cancer genetics clinics.

Although it is well known that under-referral of colon cancer patients to cancer genetics clinics is a chronic problem, no study has yet examined why physicians may be ordering testing independently rather than referring patients to cancer genetics clinics. The current study explored variables which may impact a physician's preference for ordering testing independently or referring patients to outside cancer genetics experts. An online questionnaire, distributed to the membership of the American College of Gastroenterology and the American Society of Colorectal Surgeons, yielded responses from 298 physicians. Motivations to refer to cancer genetics clinics rather than order testing independently included fear of genetic discrimination and a belief that patients benefit from genetic counseling about the risks, benefits and consequences of testing. These results suggest that in order to increase referrals, genetic counselors must educate physicians about the unique benefits patients receive from participating in genetic counseling.

Parental perspectives of children born with cleft lip and/or palate: a qualitative assessment of suggestions for healthcare improvements and interventions.

OBJECTIVE: To assess parental perspectives on effective interventions and to summarize parents' suggestions for health care professionals to improve the care provided to their children born with cleft lip and/or palate. DESIGN: Qualitative interviews. SETTING: Comprehensive craniofacial center at a Midwest pediatric hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen parents of children under the age of 1 who were born with CL/P. RESULTS: Interventions that parents identified as effective included repetition of information, showing pictures of other children (before and after surgery), and anticipatory guidance about surgeries and their child's development. Despite the high level of satisfaction, parents expressed a desire for health care professionals to use more written and visual information, to have more contact with other parents of children born with clefts, and for health care professionals outside the Craniofacial Center to be more knowledgeable about CL/P. CONCLUSIONS: Although parents of children with CL/P were for the most part satisfied with their children's care, the parents who were interviewed for this study suggested attainable changes that may result in more constructive and positive involvement of parents as integral members of the craniofacial team.