Development of a comprehensive cardiovascular disease genetic risk assessment test.

Background: Despite monogenic and polygenic contributions to cardiovascular disease (CVD), genetic testing is not widely adopted, and current tests are limited by the breadth of surveyed conditions and interpretation burden. Methods: We developed a comprehensive clinical genome CVD test with semi-automated interpretation. Monogenic conditions and risk alleles were selected based on the strength of disease association and evidence for increased disease risk, respectively. Non-CVD secondary findings genes, pharmacogenomic (PGx) variants and CVD polygenic risk scores (PRS) were assessed for inclusion. Test performance was modeled using 2,594 genomes from the 1000 Genomes Project, and further investigated in 20 previously tested individuals. Results: The CVD genome test is composed of a panel of 215 CVD gene-disease pairs, 35 non-CVD secondary findings genes, 4 risk alleles or genotypes, 10 PGx genes and a PRS for coronary artery disease. Modeling of test performance using samples from the 1000 Genomes Project revealed ~6% of individuals with a monogenic finding in a CVD-associated gene, 6% with a risk allele finding, ~1% with a non-CVD secondary finding, and 93% with CVD-associated PGx variants. Assessment of blinded clinical samples showed complete concordance with prior testing. An average of 4 variants were reviewed per case, with interpretation and reporting time ranging from 9-96 min. Conclusions: A genome sequencing based CVD genetic risk assessment can provide comprehensive genetic disease and genetic risk information to patients with CVD. The semi-automated and limited interpretation burden suggest that this testing approach could be scaled to support population-level initiatives.

MSH6 and PMS2 germ-line pathogenic variants implicated in Lynch syndrome are associated with breast cancer.

PURPOSE: An association of Lynch syndrome (LS) with breast cancer has been long suspected; however, there have been insufficient data to address this question for each of the LS genes individually. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of personal and family history in 423 women with pathogenic or likely pathogenic germ-line variants in MLH1 (N = 65), MSH2 (N = 94), MSH6 (N = 140), or PMS2 (N = 124) identified via clinical multigene hereditary cancer testing. Standard incidence ratios (SIRs) of breast cancer were calculated by comparing breast cancer frequencies in our study population with those in the general population (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 18 data). RESULTS: When evaluating by gene, the age-standardized breast cancer risks for MSH6 (SIR = 2.11; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.56-2.86) and PMS2 (SIR = 2.92; 95% CI, 2.17-3.92) were associated with a statistically significant risk for breast cancer whereas no association was observed for MLH1 (SIR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.42-1.83) or MSH2 (SIR = 1.22; 95% CI, 0.72-2.06). CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate that two LS genes, MSH6 and PMS2, are associated with an increased risk for breast cancer and should be considered when ordering genetic testing for individuals who have a personal and/or family history of breast cancer.

Statewide Retrospective Review of Familial Pancreatic Cancer in Delaware, and Frequency of Genetic Mutations in Pancreatic Cancer Kindreds.

BACKGROUND: Considering the typical rapid progression and high mortality of pancreatic cancer (PC), early detection may lead to an improved outcome. To date, there is no safe, sensitive, and cost-effective screening strategy to detect PC. Currently, screening is focused on individuals at the highest risk of developing PC based on family history. A high-risk individual is defined as having two or more first-degree relatives with PC, or one first- or second-degree relative with PC with a confirmed mutation in a gene associated with PC. The BRCA2 gene is one of the most common genes linked to pancreatic-only cancer families; however, other hereditary cancer syndromes have also been associated with an increased risk for PC. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of pedigrees of families with a pancreatic adenocarcinoma cancer diagnosis held in the statewide Ruth Ann Minner High Risk Family Cancer Registry at the Helen F. Graham Cancer Center and Research Institute, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE, USA, from 2002 to 2013. The registry was queried based on how many first-, second-, or third-degree relatives of the proband were affected with PC, genetic testing status, and (if applicable) the results. These data were then categorized into families that meet familial PC (FPC) criteria, defined as two first-degree relatives with PC (FPC families), families that did not meet the FPC definition but had one first-degree relative affected with PC (first-degree families), and probands with PC (probands). Each family was counted only once in the analysis, even if multiple family members were tested. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed that 175 of 597 families fitting any of the above criteria completed genetic testing. Of this cohort, 52 had pathogenic alterations with nine different genes implicated. Overall, 164 of the 175 families that fitted into any of the three categories previously identified had BRCA1 or BRCA2 testing, either by DNA sequencing or next-generation sequencing via a panel test that included BRCA1/2. BRCA1 pathogenic alterations were noted in 17/164 (10.4 %) and BRCA2 pathogenic alterations were noted in 23/164 (14.0 %). FPC families (n = 46) 42/46 of the FPC families underwent BRCA1/2 testing, and 11/42 (26 % [95 % CI 12.89-39.49]) had pathogenic alterations. Specifically, 4/42 = BRCA1 (9.5 %) and 7/42 = BRCA2 (16.7 %). Additionally, 16/46 of the FPC families underwent exclusively Lynch syndrome (LS) testing, and pathogenic mutations in a mismatch repair protein were identified in 2/16. Specifically, 1/16 = MLH1 (6.3 %) and 1/16 = MSH2 (3.6 %). Overall, a genetic mutation within any gene associated with an increased PC risk was found in 28 % of FPC families. First-degree families (n = 106) 99/106 of the families with one first-degree relative underwent BRCA1/2 testing, and 21/99 (21.2 % [95 % CI 13.16-29.27]) had pathogenic alterations. Specifically, 11/99 = BRCA1 (11.1 %) and 10/99 = BRCA2 (10.1 %). 32/99 first-degree families underwent exclusively LS testing, and pathogenic mutations were identified in 4/32. Specifically, 3/32 = MLH1 (9 %) and 1/32 = MSH6 (3 %). 25/99 of the families pursued panel testing, and pathogenic alterations in any gene were identified in 3/25. Specifically, the mutations were found in 1/25 = ATM (4 %), 1/25 = CHEK2 (4 %), and 1/25 = RAD51D (4 %). Affected probands (n = 23) Lastly, all 23 probands affected with PC pursued genetic testing. Of these, 11/23 were found to have pathogenic alterations. All 23 underwent BRCA1/2 testing, and pathogenic alterations were identified in 8/23 (35 % [95 % CI 15.32-54.25]), specifically 2/23 = BRCA1 (9 %), and 6/23 = BRCA2 (26 %). 10/23 patients underwent panel testing and pathogenic alterations were found in 3/10 (30 %) patients, of whom 1/10 = MSH6 (10 %), 1/10 = ATM (10 %), and 1/10 = TP53 (10 %). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that a statewide high-risk family cancer registry is an important instrument in studying the risk of PC in families. Our analysis revealed 14 mutations associated with FPC, among which hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and LS were most prevalent. BRCA1 was found to have the same association with PC as BRCA2, which appears unique to our population. We plan to use our knowledge of these mutations in developing a PC screening program.