Pathogenic germline variants in patients with endometrial cancer of diverse ancestry.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in outcomes exist in endometrial cancer (EC). The contribution of ancestry-based variations in germline pathogenic variants (gPVs) is unknown. METHODS: Germline assessment of ≥76 cancer predisposition genes was performed in patients with EC undergoing tumor-normal Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets sequencing from January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2021. Self-reported race/ethnicity and Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry data classified patients into groups. Genetic ancestry was inferred from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets. Rates of gPV and genetic counseling were compared by ancestry. RESULTS: Among 1625 patients with EC, 216 (13%) had gPVs; 15 had >1 gPV. Rates of gPV varied by self-reported ancestry (Ashkenazi Jewish, 40/202 [20%]; Asian, 15/124 [12%]; Black/African American (AA), 12/171 [7.0%]; Hispanic, 15/124 [12%]; non-Hispanic (NH) White, 129/927 [14%]; missing, 5/77 [6.5%]; p = .009], with similar findings by genetic ancestry (p < .001). We observed a lower likelihood of gPVs in patients of Black/AA (odds ratio [OR], 0.44; 95% CI, 0.22-0.81) and African (AFR) ancestry (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18-0.85) and a higher likelihood in patients of Ashkenazi Jewish genetic ancestry (OR, 1.62; 95% CI; 1.11-2.34) compared with patients of non-Hispanic White/European ancestry, even after adjustment for age and molecular subtype. Somatic landscape influenced gPVs with lower rates of microsatellite instability-high tumors in patients of Black/AA and AFR ancestry. Among those with newly identified gPVs (n = 114), 102 (89%) were seen for genetic counseling, with lowest rates among Black/AA (75%) and AFR patients (67%). CONCLUSIONS: In those with EC, gPV and genetic counseling varied by ancestry, with lowest rates among Black/AA and AFR patients, potentially contributing to disparities in outcomes given implications for treatment and cancer prevention. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Black women with endometrial cancer do worse than White women, and there are many reasons for this disparity. Certain genetic changes from birth (mutations) can increase the risk of cancer, and it is unknown if rates of these changes are different between different ancestry groups. Genetic mutations in 1625 diverse women with endometrial cancer were studied and the lowest rates of mutations and genetic counseling were found in Black and African ancestry women. This could affect their treatment options as well as their families and may make disparities worse.

Pathogenic germline variants in non-BRCA1/2 homologous recombination genes in ovarian cancer: Analysis of tumor phenotype and survival.

OBJECTIVE: To define molecular features of ovarian cancer (OC) with germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in non-BRCA homologous recombination (HR) genes and analyze survival compared to BRCA1/2 and wildtype (WT) OC. METHODS: We included patients with OC undergoing tumor-normal sequencing (MSK-IMPACT) from 07/01/2015-12/31/2020, including germline assessment of BRCA1/2 and other HR genes ATM, BARD1, BRIP1, FANCA, FANCC, NBN, PALB2, RAD50, RAD51B, RAD51C, and RAD51D. Biallelic inactivation was assessed within tumors. Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from pathologic diagnosis using the Kaplan-Meier method with left truncation. Whole-exome sequencing (WES) was performed in a subset. RESULTS: Of 882 patients with OC, 56 (6.3%) had germline PVs in non-BRCA HR genes; 95 (11%) had BRCA1-associated OC (58 germline, 37 somatic); and 59 (6.7%) had BRCA2-associated OC (40 germline, 19 somatic). High rates of biallelic alterations were observed among germline PVs in BRIP1 (11/13), PALB2 (3/4), RAD51B (3/4), RAD51C (3/4), and RAD51D (8/10). In cases with WES (27/35), there was higher tumor mutational burden (TMB; median 2.5 [1.1-6.0] vs. 1.2 mut/Mb [0.6-2.6]) and enrichment of HR-deficient (HRD) mutational signatures in tumors associated with germline PALB2 and RAD51B/C/D compared with BRIP1 PVs (p < 0.01). Other features of HRD, including telomeric-allelic imbalance (TAI) and large-scale state transitions (LSTs), were similar. Although there was heterogeneity in PFS/OS by gene group, only BRCA1/2-associated OC had improved survival compared to WT OC (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: OCs associated with germline PVs in non-BRCA HR genes represent a heterogenous group, with PALB2 and RAD51B/C/D associated with an HRD phenotype.

Germline Pathogenic Variants and Genetic Counseling by Ancestry in Patients With Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate rates of germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PVs) and genetic counseling by ancestry in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). METHODS: Patients with pathologically confirmed EOC who underwent clinical tumor-normal sequencing from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020, inclusive of germline analysis of ≥76 genes were included. Patients with newly identified PVs were referred for Clinical Genetics Service (CGS) counseling. Ancestry groups were defined using self-reported race/ethnicity and Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) heritage. Genetic ancestry was inferred computationally using validated algorithms. Logistic regression models were built. RESULTS: Of 1,266 patients, self-reported ancestry (AJ, 17%; Asian, 10%; Black/African American, 5.4%; Hispanic, 6.2%; non-Hispanic White, 57%; other, 0.16%; unknown, 4.0%) correlated with genetic ancestry (AJ ancestry, 18%; admixed, 10%; African, 4%; East Asian [EAS], 6%; European, 56%; Native American, 0.2%; South Asian [SAS], 4%; unknown, 2%). Germline PVs were observed in 313 (25%) patients, including 195 (15%) with PVs in EOC-associated genes. Those with PVs were younger at diagnosis (59 v 62 years; P < .001) and more likely to have high-grade serous ovarian cancer (83% v 72%; P = .009). PV prevalence varied between ancestry groups (P < .001), with highest rates in the AJ (39.9%) and Asian (26.5%) groups and similar rates (>10%) across other ancestry groups. Use of genetic ancestry demonstrated similar findings and further characterized high rates of PV in EAS/SAS groups. Younger age, high-grade serous histology, and self-reported AJ or Asian ancestry were associated with PV in an EOC-associated gene. Rates of CGS counseling for newly identified PVs were high (80%) across ancestry groups. CONCLUSION: Rates of PV, particularly in EOC-associated genes, were high regardless of ancestry, with similar rates of counseling between groups, emphasizing the importance of universal genetic testing in all patients with EOC.

Prevalence and Clinical Implications of Mismatch Repair-Proficient Colorectal Cancer in Patients With Lynch Syndrome.

PURPOSE: Lynch syndrome (LS)-associated colorectal cancer (CRC) is characterized by mismatch repair-deficiency (MMR-D) and/or microsatellite instability (MSI). However, with increasing utilization of germline testing, MMR-proficient (MMR-P) and/or microsatellite stable (MSS) CRC has also been observed. We sought to characterize MMR-P/MSS CRC among patients with LS. METHODS: Patients with solid tumors with germline MMR pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants were identified on a prospective matched tumor-normal next-generation sequencing (NGS) protocol. CRCs were evaluated for MMR-D via immunohistochemical (IHC) staining and/or MSI via NGS. Clinical variables were correlated with MMR status using nonparametric tests. RESULTS: Among 17,617 patients with solid tumors, 1.4% (n = 242) had LS. A total of 36% (86 of 242) of patients with LS had at least one CRC that underwent NGS profiling, amounting to 99 pooled CRCs assessed. A total of 10% (10 of 99) of CRCs were MMR-P, with 100% concordance between MSS status and retained MMR protein staining. A total of 89% (8 of 9) of patients in the MMR-P group had MSH6 or PMS2 variants, compared with 30% (23 of 77) in the MMR-D group (P = .001). A total of 46% (6 of 13) of PMS2+ patients had MMR-P CRC. The median age of onset was 58 and 43 years for MMR-P and MMR-D CRC, respectively (P = .07). Despite the later median age of onset, 40% (4 of 10) of MMR-P CRCs were diagnosed <50. A total of 60% (6 of 10) of MMR-P CRCs were metastatic compared with 13% (12 of 89) of MMR-D CRCs (P = .002). A total of 33% (3 of 9) of patients with MMR-P CRC did not meet LS testing criteria. CONCLUSION: Patients with LS remained at risk for MMR-P CRC, which was more prevalent among patients with MSH6 and PMS2 variants. MMR-P CRC was later onset and more commonly metastatic compared with MMR-D CRC. Confirmation of tumor MMR/MSI status is critical for patient management and familial risk estimation.

Germline drivers of gynecologic carcinosarcomas.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (gPVs) in endometrial and ovarian carcinosarcomas and determine if gPVs are drivers of carcinosarcoma. METHODS: Patients with endometrial or ovarian carcinosarcomas who underwent clinical tumor-normal sequencing from 1/1/2015 to 6/1/2021 and consented to germline assessment of ≥76 cancer predisposition genes were included. In patients with gPVs, biallelic inactivation was identified through analysis of loss of heterozygosity and somatic pathogenic alterations. RESULTS: Of 216 patients identified, 167 (77%) were diagnosed with endometrial carcinosarcoma and 49 (23%) with ovarian carcinosarcoma. Overall, 33 gPVs were observed in 29 patients (13%); 20 gPVs (61%) had biallelic loss in tumors. The rate of high-penetrance gPVs overall was 7% (16 of 216); 88% of high-penetrance gPVs had biallelic loss. In the endometrial carcinosarcoma cohort, 22 gPVs were found in 19 (11%) of 167 patients; 12 gPVs (55%) had biallelic loss in tumors, including 8 (89%) of 9 in high-penetrance gPVs. Among the ovarian carcinosarcoma cohort, 11 gPVs were found in 10 (20%) of 49 patients; 8 gPVs (73%) had biallelic loss in tumors, and all evaluable high-penetrance gPVs (n = 6) had biallelic loss. All gPVs in homologous recombination (BRCA1, BRCA2, RAD51C) and Lynch syndrome (MSH2, MSH6) genes had biallelic loss in tumors (n = 15). CONCLUSIONS: gPVs in genes affecting homologous recombination- or Lynch-associated mismatch repair exhibited biallelic inactivation within tumors, suggesting likely drivers of gynecologic carcinosarcoma. Our data support germline testing for patients with gynecologic carcinosarcomas, given implications for treatment and risk-reduction in patients and at-risk family members.

Factors associated with detection of hereditary diffuse gastric cancer on endoscopy in individuals with germline CDH1 mutations.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Individuals with germline pathogenic CDH1 variants have a high risk of hereditary diffuse gastric cancer. The sensitivity of EGD in detecting signet ring cell carcinoma (SRCC) in this population is low. We aimed to identify endoscopic findings and biopsy practices associated with detection of SRCC. METHODS: This retrospective cohort included individuals with a germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic CDH1 variant undergoing at least 1 EGD at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between January 1, 2006, and March 25, 2022. The primary outcome was detection of SRCC on EGD. Findings on gastrectomy were also assessed. The study included periods before and after implementation of the Cambridge protocol for endoscopic surveillance, allowing for assessment of a spectrum of biopsy practices. RESULTS: Ninety-eight CDH1 patients underwent at least 1 EGD at our institution. SRCC was detected in 20 (20%) individuals on EGD overall and in 50 (86%) of the 58 patients undergoing gastrectomy. Most SRCC foci were detected in the gastric cardia/fundus (EGD, 50%; gastrectomy, 62%) and body/transition zone (EGD, 60%; gastrectomy, 62%). Biopsy results of gastric pale mucosal areas were associated with detection of SRCC (P < .01). The total number of biopsy samples taken on EGD was associated with increased detection of SRCC (P = .01), with 43% detected when ≥40 samples were taken. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted biopsy sampling of gastric pale mucosal areas and increasing number of biopsy samples taken on EGD were associated with detection of SRCC. SRCC foci were mostly detected in the proximal stomach, supporting updated endoscopic surveillance guidelines. Further studies are needed to refine endoscopic protocols to improve SRCC detection in this high-risk population.

Comprehensive analysis of germline drivers in endometrial cancer.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (gPVs) in unselected patients with endometrial cancer (EC), define biallelic gPVs within tumors, and describe their associations with clinicopathologic features. METHODS: Germline assessment of at least 76 cancer predisposition genes was performed in patients with EC undergoing clinical tumor-normal Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets (MSK-IMPACT) sequencing from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2021. In patients with gPVs, biallelic alterations in ECs were identified through analysis of loss of heterozygosity and somatic PVs. Clinicopathologic variables were compared using nonparametric tests. RESULTS: Of 1625 patients with EC, 216 (13%) had gPVs, and 15 patients had 2 gPVs. There were 231 gPVs in 35 genes (75 [32%] high penetrance; 39 [17%] moderate penetrance; and 117 [51%] low, recessive, or uncertain penetrance). Compared with those without gPVs, patients with gPVs were younger (P = .002), more often White (P = .009), and less obese (P = .025) and had differences in distribution of tumor histology (P = .017) and molecular subtype (P < .001). Among 231 gPVs, 74 (32%) exhibited biallelic inactivation within tumors. For high-penetrance gPVs, 63% (47 of 75) of ECs had biallelic alterations, primarily affecting mismatch repair (MMR) and homologous recombination related genes, including BRCA1,BRCA2, RAD51D, and PALB2. Biallelic inactivation varied across molecular subtypes with highest rates in microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) or copy-number (CN)-high subtypes (3 of 12 [25%] POLE, 30 of 77 [39%] MSI-H, 27 of 60 [45%] CN-high, 9 of 57 [16%] CN-low; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Of unselected patients with EC, 13% had gPVs, with 63% of gPVs in high-penetrance genes (MMR and homologous recombination) exhibiting biallelic inactivation, potentially driving cancer development. This supports germline assessment in EC given implications for treatment and cancer prevention.

Attitudes toward preimplantation genetic testing and quality of life among individuals with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer (HDGC) syndrome is an autosomal dominant hereditary cancer predisposition associated with germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in the CDH1 gene. Identifying early stage HDGC is difficult, and prophylactic measures can be effective in preventing incidence. Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT) can provide information about CDH1 variant status, HDGC risk, and limit familial transmission of CDH1 variants. To date, however, little is known about the attitudes of individuals with CDH1 variants towards PGT. METHODS: Given that little is known about the reproductive attitudes of individuals with HDGC, we recruited participants with CDH1 variants from a familial gastric cancer registry and administered a cross-sectional survey with open- and closed-ended response items. We assessed attitudes regarding PGT and the effect of HDGC on quality of life. RESULTS: Participants (n = 21) were predominantly partnered (61.9%), had a personal cancer history (71.4%), and had biological children (71.4%). Interest in learning about PGT was high; 66.7% of participants were interested in PGT and 90.5% approved of healthcare providers discussing PGT with individuals with CDH1 variants. Attitudes regarding personal use were varied. Among all participants, 35% would not, 25% were uncertain, and 40% would use PGT. Personal philosophy and preferences for family and reproduction were key factors related to PGT attitudes. HDGC had moderate effects on participants' quality of life, including social relationships, health behaviors, and emotional experiences including worry about cancer risk and guilt regarding familial implications. CONCLUSION: PGT was identified by participants as acceptable for use in a variety of contexts and benefits of reproductive counseling involving PGT may extend beyond CDH1 carriers to family members' reproductive behaviors. Dispositions towards PGT are governed by personal philosophy or belief systems. These findings can help guide providers counseling individuals with CDH1 variants.

Disparities in cancer genetics care by race/ethnicity among pan-cancer patients with pathogenic germline variants.

BACKGROUND: Germline risk assessment is increasing as part of cancer care; however, disparities in subsequent genetic counseling are unknown. METHODS: Pan-cancer patients were prospectively consented to tumor-normal sequencing via custom next generation sequencing panel (Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets) inclusive of germline analysis of ≥76 genes from January 2015 through December 2019 (97.5% research nonbillable) with protocol for genetics referral. Rates of pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline variants (PVs) and downstream counseling were compared across ancestry groups (mutually exclusive groups based on self-reported race/ethnicity and Ashkenazi Jewish [AJ] heritage) using nonparametric tests and multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among 15,775 patients (59.6%, non-Hispanic [NH]-White; 15.7%, AJ; 20.5%, non-White [6.9%, Asian; 6.8%, Black/African American (AA); 6.7%, Hispanic; 0.1%, Other], and 4.2%, unknown), 2663 (17%) had a PV. Non-White patients had a lower PV rate (n = 433, 13.4%) compared to NH-Whites (n = 1451, 15.4%) and AJ patients (n = 683, 27.6%), p < .01, with differences in mostly moderate and low/recessive/uncertain penetrance variants. Among 2239 patients with new PV, 1652 (73.8%) completed recommended genetic counseling. Non-White patients had lower rates of genetic counseling (67.7%) than NH-White (73.7%) and AJ patients (78.8%), p < .01, with lower rates occurring in Black/AA (63%) compared to NH-White patients, even after adjustment for confounders (odds ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.97; p = .036). Non-White, particularly Black/AA and Asian, probands had a trend toward lower rates and numbers of at-risk family members being seen for counseling/genetic testing. CONCLUSIONS: Despite minimizing barriers to genetic testing, non-White patients were less likely to receive recommended cancer genetics follow-up, with potential implications for oncologic care, cancer risk reduction, and at-risk family members. LAY SUMMARY: Genetic testing is becoming an important part of cancer care, and we wanted to see if genetics care was different between individuals of different backgrounds. We studied 15,775 diverse patients with cancer who had genetic testing using a test called MSK-IMPACT that was covered by research funding. Clinically important genetic findings were high in all groups. However, Black patients were less likely to get recommended counseling compared to White patients. Even after removing many roadblocks, non-White and especially Black patients were less likely to get recommended genetics care, which may affect their cancer treatments and families.

Diagnostic yield and clinical relevance of expanded genetic testing for cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Genetic testing (GT) for hereditary cancer predisposition is traditionally performed on selected genes based on established guidelines for each cancer type. Recently, expanded GT (eGT) using large hereditary cancer gene panels uncovered hereditary predisposition in a greater proportion of patients than previously anticipated. We sought to define the diagnostic yield of eGT and its clinical relevance in a broad cancer patient population over a 5-year period. METHODS: A total of 17,523 cancer patients with a broad range of solid tumors, who received eGT at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between July 2015 to April 2020, were included in the study. The patients were unselected for current GT criteria such as cancer type, age of onset, and/or family history of disease. The diagnostic yield of eGT was determined for each cancer type. For 9187 patients with five common cancer types frequently interrogated for hereditary predisposition (breast, colorectal, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer), the rate of pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants in genes that have been associated with each cancer type was analyzed. The clinical implications of additional findings in genes not known to be associated with a patients' cancer type were investigated. RESULTS: 16.7% of patients in a broad cancer cohort had P/LP variants in hereditary cancer predisposition genes identified by eGT. The diagnostic yield of eGT in patients with breast, colorectal, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer was 17.5%, 15.3%, 24.2%, 19.4%, and 15.9%, respectively. Additionally, 8% of the patients with five common cancers had P/LP variants in genes not known to be associated with the patient's current cancer type, with 0.8% of them having such a variant that confers a high risk for another cancer type. Analysis of clinical and family histories revealed that 74% of patients with variants in genes not associated with their current cancer type but which conferred a high risk for another cancer did not meet the current GT criteria for the genes harboring these variants. One or more variants of uncertain significance were identified in 57% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to targeted testing approaches, eGT can increase the yield of detection of hereditary cancer predisposition in patients with a range of tumors, allowing opportunities for enhanced surveillance and intervention. The benefits of performing eGT should be weighed against the added number of VUSs identified with this approach.

Early age of onset and broad cancer spectrum persist in MSH6- and PMS2-associated Lynch syndrome.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to characterize MSH6/PMS2-associated mismatch repair-deficient (MMR-D)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors, given revised guidelines suggesting more modest phenotypes. METHODS: Patients who consented to Institutional Review Board-approved protocols of tumor/germline sequencing or Lynch syndrome registry at a single institution from February 2005 to January 2021 with germline, heterozygous MSH6/PMS2 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants were identified. Clinical data were abstracted and correlated with MMR/microsatellite instability status using nonparametric tests. RESULTS: We identified 243 patients (133 sequencing, 110 registry) with germline MSH6/PMS2 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants; 186 (77%) had >1 cancer. Of 261 pooled tumors, colorectal cancer (CRC) and endometrial cancer (EC) comprised 55% and 43% of cancers in MSH6 and PMS2, respectively; 192 tumors underwent molecular assessments and 122 (64%) were MMR-D/MSI-H (77 in MSH6, 45 in PMS2). MMR-D/MSI-H cancers included CRC (n = 56), EC (n = 35), small bowel cancer (n = 6), ovarian cancer (n = 6), urothelial cancer (n = 5), pancreas/biliary cancer (n = 4), gastric/esophageal cancer (n = 3), nonmelanoma skin tumors (n = 3), prostate cancer (n = 2), breast cancer (n = 1), and central nervous system/brain cancer (n = 1). Among MMR-D/MSI-H CRC and EC, median age of diagnosis was 51.5 (range = 27-80) and 55 (range = 39-74) years, respectively; 9 of 56 (16%) MMR-D/MSI-H CRCs were diagnosed at age <35 years. CONCLUSION: MSH6/PMS2 heterozygotes remain at risk for a broad spectrum of cancers, with 16% of MMR-D/MSI-H CRCs presenting before upper threshold of initiation of colonoscopy per guidelines.

Factors Influencing Patient Preferences for Telehealth Cancer Genetic Counseling During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: With onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth became the primary modality for health care appointments. This study examined patient experiences with and preferences for telehealth at a cancer genetic counseling clinic throughout the first 6 months of the pandemic (March-August 2020). METHODS: An anonymous survey assessed patient demographics; usage and prior experience with technology; emotional responses, technical experiences, and satisfaction with the telehealth appointment (via the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale and Visit-Specific Satisfaction Questionnaire); preference for future telehealth; and recommendation of telehealth to others. RESULTS: Among 380 respondents, most were highly satisfied with the telehealth appointment (with 65.6% and 66.4% of participants completing the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale and Visit-Specific Satisfaction Questionnaire, respectively). Multivariable analyses indicated several notable findings. Adjusting for relevant covariates, participants with less education felt significantly more concerned about telehealth than those with highest educational attainment. Participants age 40-69 years were generally more comfortable, relieved, and grateful that their appointment was scheduled as telehealth than were those older than 70 years. Women were marginally more relieved and grateful for telehealth appointments than men. As the pandemic progressed, significantly more participants were highly satisfied with their telehealth appointment and participants trended toward having greater preferences for future telehealth use. Most participants (78.6%) would recommend telehealth to others, although 50.8% preferred future in-person appointments. CONCLUSION: As the pandemic progressed, patients expressed increasing preferences for and satisfaction with telehealth. Service delivery models that incorporate individual patient preferences should be developed with special consideration to factors such as age, sex, and education level.

Multiple Primary Cancers in Patients Undergoing Tumor-Normal Sequencing Define Novel Associations.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors are developing more subsequent tumors. We sought to characterize patients with multiple (≥2) primary cancers (MPC) to assess associations and genetic mechanisms. METHODS: Patients were prospectively consented (01/2013-02/2019) to tumor-normal sequencing via a custom targeted panel (MSK-IMPACT). A subset consented to return of results of ≥76 cancer predisposition genes. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) 2004 rules for defining MPC were applied. Tumor pairs were created to assess relationships between cancers. Age-adjusted, sex-specific, standardized incidence ratios (SIR) for first to second cancer event combinations were calculated using SEER rates, adjusting for confounders and time of ascertainment. Associations were made with germline and somatic variants. RESULTS: Of 24,241 patients, 4,340 had MPC (18%); 20% were synchronous. Most (80%) had two primaries; however, 4% had ≥4 cancers. SIR analysis found lymphoma-lung, lymphoma-uterine, breast-brain, and melanoma-lung pairs in women and prostate-mesothelioma, prostate-sarcoma, melanoma-stomach, and prostate-brain pairs in men in excess of expected after accounting for synchronous tumors, known inherited cancer syndromes, and environmental exposures. Of 1,580 (36%) patients who received germline results, 324 (21%) had 361 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PV), 159 (44%) in high penetrance genes. Of tumor samples analyzed, 55% exhibited loss of heterozygosity at the germline variant. In those with negative germline findings, melanoma, prostate, and breast cancers were common. CONCLUSIONS: We identified tumor pairs without known predisposing mutations that merit confirmation and will require novel strategies to elucidate genetic mechanisms of shared susceptibilities. IMPACT: If verified, patients with MPC with novel phenotypes may benefit from targeted cancer surveillance.

A Comprehensive Comparison of Early-Onset and Average-Onset Colorectal Cancers.

BACKGROUND: The causative factors for the recent increase in early-onset colorectal cancer (EO-CRC) incidence are unknown. We sought to determine if early-onset disease is clinically or genomically distinct from average-onset colorectal cancer (AO-CRC). METHODS: Clinical, histopathologic, and genomic characteristics of EO-CRC patients (2014-2019), divided into age 35 years and younger and 36-49 years at diagnosis, were compared with AO-CRC (50 years and older). Patients with mismatch repair deficient tumors, CRC-related hereditary syndromes, and inflammatory bowel disease were excluded from all but the germline analysis. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: In total, 759 patients with EO-CRC (35 years, n = 151; 36-49 years, n = 608) and AO-CRC (n = 687) were included. Left-sided tumors (35 years and younger = 80.8%; 36-49 years = 83.7%; AO = 63.9%; P < .001 for both comparisons), rectal bleeding (35 years and younger = 41.1%; 36-49 years = 41.0%; AO = 25.9%; P = .001 and P < .001, respectively), and abdominal pain (35 years and younger = 37.1%; 36-49 years = 34.0%; AO = 26.8%; P = .01 and P = .005, respectively) were more common in EO-CRC. Among microsatellite stable tumors, we found no differences in histopathologic tumor characteristics. Initially, differences in TP53 and Receptor Tyrosine Kinase signaling pathway (RTK-RAS)alterations were noted by age. However, on multivariate analysis including somatic gene analysis and tumor sidedness, no statistically significant differences at the gene or pathway level were demonstrated. Among advanced microsatellite stable CRCs, chemotherapy response and survival were equivalent by age cohorts. Pathogenic germline variants were identified in 23.3% of patients 35 years and younger vs 14.1% of AO-CRC (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: EO-CRCs are more commonly left-sided and present with rectal bleeding and abdominal pain but are otherwise clinically and genomically indistinguishable from AO-CRCs. Aggressive treatment regimens based solely on the age at CRC diagnosis are not warranted.

Pancreas cancer and BRCA: A critical subset of patients with improving therapeutic outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with germline/somatic BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations (g/sBRCA1/2) comprise a distinct biologic subgroup of pancreas ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: Institutional databases were queried to identify patients who had PDAC with g/sBRCA1/2. Demographics, clinicopathologic details, genomic data (annotation sBRCA1/2 according to a precision oncology knowledge base for somatic mutations), zygosity, and outcomes were abstracted. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: In total, 136 patients with g/sBRCA1/2 were identified between January 2011 and June 2020. Germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2) mutation was identified in 116 patients (85%). Oncogenic somatic BRCA1/2 (sBRCA1/2) mutation was present in 20 patients (15%). Seventy-seven patients had biallelic BRCA1/2 mutations (83%), and 16 (17%) had heterozygous mutations. Sixty-five patients with stage IV disease received frontline platinum therapy, and 52 (80%) had a partial response. The median OS for entire cohort was 27.6 months (95% CI, 24.9-34.5 months), and the median OS for patients who had stage IV disease was 23 months (95% CI, 19-26 months). Seventy-one patients received a poly(adenosine diphosphate ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor (PARPi), and 52 received PARPi monotherapy. For maintenance PARPi, 10 patients (36%) had a partial response, 12 (43%) had stable disease, and 6 (21%) had progression of disease as their best response. Six patients (21%) received maintenance PARPi for >2 years. For those with stage IV disease who received frontline platinum, the median OS was 26 months (95% CI, 20-52 months) for biallelic patients (n = 39) and 8.66 months (95% CI, 6.2 months to not reached) for heterozygous patients (n = 4). The median OS for those who received PARPi therapy was 26.5 months (95% CI, 24-53 months) for biallelic patients (n = 25) and 8.66 months (95% CI, 7.23 months to not reached) for heterozygous patients (n = 2). CONCLUSIONS: g/sBRCA1/2 mutations did not appear to have different actionable utility. Platinum and PARPi therapies offer therapeutic benefit, and very durable outcomes are observed in a subset of patients who have g/sBRCA1/2 mutations with biallelic status.

Prevalence and Characterization of Biallelic and Monoallelic NTHL1 and MSH3 Variant Carriers From a Pan-Cancer Patient Population.

NTHL1 and MSH3 have been implicated as autosomal recessive cancer predisposition genes. Although individuals with biallelic NTHL1 and MSH3 pathogenic variants (PVs) have increased cancer and polyposis risk, risks for monoallelic carriers are uncertain. We sought to assess the prevalence and characterize NTHL1 and MSH3 from a large pan-cancer patient population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with pan-cancer (n = 11,081) underwent matched tumor-normal sequencing with consent for germline analysis. Medical records and tumors were reviewed and analyzed. Prevalence of PVs was compared with reference controls (Genome Aggregation Database). RESULTS: NTHL1-PVs were identified in 40 patients including 39 monoallelic carriers (39/11,081 = 0.35%) and one with biallelic variants (1/11,081 = 0.009%) and a diagnosis of isolated early-onset breast cancer. NTHL1-associated mutational signature 30 was identified in the tumors of the biallelic patient and two carriers. Colonic polyposis was not identified in any NTHL1 patient. MSH3-PVs were identified in 13 patients, including 12 monoallelic carriers (12/11,081 = 0.11%) and one with biallelic MSH3 variants (1/11,081 = 0.009%) and diagnoses of later-onset cancers, attenuated polyposis, and abnormal MSH3-protein expression. Of the 12 MSH3 carriers, two had early-onset cancer diagnoses with tumor loss of heterozygosity of the wild-type MSH3 allele. Ancestry-specific burden tests demonstrated that NTHL1 and MSH3 prevalence was not significantly different in this pan-cancer population versus controls. CONCLUSION: NTHL1 and MSH3 germline alterations were not enriched in this pan-cancer patient population. However, tumor-specific findings, such as mutational signature 30 and loss of heterozygosity of the wild-type allele, suggest the potential contribution of monoallelic variants to tumorigenesis in a subset of patients.

Paired Tumor-Normal Sequencing Provides Insights Into the TP53-Related Cancer Spectrum in Patients With Li-Fraumeni Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Genetic testing for Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is performed by using blood specimens from patients selected based on phenotype-dependent guidelines. This approach is problematic for understanding the LFS clinical spectrum because patients with nonclassical presentations are missed, clonal hematopoiesis-related somatic blood alterations cannot be distinguished from germline variants, and unrelated tumors cannot be differentiated from those driven by germline TP53 defects. METHODS: To provide insights into the LFS-related cancer spectrum, we analyzed paired tumor-blood DNA sequencing results in 17 922 patients with cancer and distinguished clonal hematopoiesis-related, mosaic, and germline TP53 variants. Loss of heterozygosity and TP53 mutational status were assessed in tumors, followed by immunohistochemistry for p53 expression on a subset to identify those lacking biallelic TP53 inactivation. RESULTS: Pathogenic/likely pathogenic TP53 variants were identified in 50 patients, 12 (24.0%) of which were clonal hematopoiesis related and 4 (8.0%) of which were mosaic. Twelve (35.3%) of 34 patients with germline TP53 variants did not meet LFS testing criteria. Loss of heterozygosity of germline TP53 variant was observed in 96.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 79.7% to 99.9%) of core LFS spectrum-type tumors vs 45.5% (95% CI = 16.8% to 76.6%) of other tumors and 91.3% (95% CI = 72.0% to 98.9%) of tumors from patients who met LFS testing criteria vs 61.5% (95% CI = 31.6% to 86.1%) of tumors from patients who did not. Tumors retaining the wild-type TP53 allele exhibited wild-type p53 expression. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that some TP53 variants identified in blood-only sequencing are not germline and a substantial proportion of patients with LFS are missed based on current testing guidelines. Additionally, a subset of tumors from patients with LFS do not have biallelic TP53 inactivation and may represent cancers unrelated to their germline TP53 defect.

Uptake and acceptability of a mainstreaming model of hereditary cancer multigene panel testing among patients with ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To address demands for timely germline information to guide treatments, we evaluated experiences of patients with ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer with a mainstreaming genetic testing model wherein multigene panel testing was ordered by oncologists with standardized pretest patient education, and genetic counselors delivered results and post-test genetic counseling via telephone. METHODS: Among 1,203 eligible patients, we conducted a prospective single-arm study to examine patient uptake and acceptability (via self-report surveys at baseline and three weeks and three months following result return) of this mainstreaming model. RESULTS: Only 10% of eligible patients declined participation. Among 1,054 tested participants, 10% had pathogenic variants (PV), 16% had variants of uncertain significance (VUS), and 74% had no variant identified (NV). Participants reported high initial acceptability, including high satisfaction with their testing decision. Variability over time in several outcomes existed for participants with PV or NV: those with NV experienced a temporary increase in depression (pTime < 0.001; pTime2 < 0.001), and those with PV experienced a small increase in genetic testing distress (p = 0.03). Findings suggested that result type, sex, and cancer type were also associated with outcomes including clinical depression and uncertainty. CONCLUSION: This mainstreaming model may offer a feasible approach for extending access to germline genetic information.

Prospective pan-cancer germline testing using MSK-IMPACT informs clinical translation in 751 patients with pediatric solid tumors.

The spectrum of germline predisposition in pediatric cancer continues to be realized. Here we report 751 solid tumor patients who underwent prospective matched tumor-normal DNA sequencing and downstream clinical use (clinicaltrials.gov NCT01775072). Germline pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants were reported. One or more P/LP variants were found in 18% (138/751) of individuals when including variants in low, moderate, and high penetrance dominant or recessive genes, or 13% (99/751) in moderate and high penetrance dominant genes. 34% of high or moderate penetrance variants were unexpected based on the patient's diagnosis and previous history. 76% of patients with positive results completed a clinical genetics visit, and 21% had at least one relative undergo cascade testing as a result of this testing. Clinical actionability additionally included screening, risk reduction in relatives, reproductive use, and use of targeted therapies. Germline testing should be considered for all children with cancer.

Therapeutic Implications of Germline Testing in Patients With Advanced Cancers.

PURPOSE: Tumor mutational profiling is increasingly performed in patients with advanced cancer. We determined the extent to which germline mutation profiling guides therapy selection in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: Patients with cancer undergoing tumor genomic profiling were prospectively consented for germline cancer predisposition gene analysis (2015-2019). In patients harboring germline likely pathogenic or pathogenic (LP/P) alterations, therapeutic actionability was classified using a precision oncology knowledge base. Patients with metastatic or recurrent cancer receiving germline genotype-directed therapy were determined. RESULTS: Among 11,947 patients across > 50 malignancies, 17% (n = 2,037) harbored a germline LP/P variant. By oncology knowledge base classification, 9% (n = 1042) had an LP/P variant in a gene with therapeutic implications (4% level 1; 4% level 3B; < 1% level 4). BRCA1/2 variants accounted for 42% of therapeutically actionable findings, followed by CHEK2 (13%), ATM (12%), mismatch repair genes (11%), and PALB2 (5%). When limited to the 9,079 patients with metastatic or recurrent cancer, 8% (n = 710) harbored level 1 or 3B genetic findings and 3.2% (n = 289) received germline genotype-directed therapy. Germline genotype-directed therapy was received by 61% and 18% of metastatic cancer patients with level 1 and level 3B findings, respectively, and by 54% of BRCA1/2, 75% of mismatch repair, 43% of PALB2, 35% of RAD51C/D, 24% of BRIP1, and 19% of ATM carriers. Of BRCA1/2 patients receiving a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, 45% (84 of 188) had tumors other than breast or ovarian cancer, wherein the drug, at time of delivery, was delivered in an investigational setting. CONCLUSION: In a pan-cancer analysis, 8% of patients with advanced cancer harbored a germline variant with therapeutic actionability with 40% of these patients receiving germline genotype-directed treatment. Germline sequence analysis is additive to tumor sequence analysis for therapy selection and should be considered for all patients with advanced cancer.