Author:
Andoni Tala,Wiggins Jennifer,Robinson Rachel,Charlton Ruth,Sandberg Michael,Eeles Rosalind
Abstract
AbstractGenetic testing for cancer predisposition has been curtailed by the cost of sequencing, and testing has been restricted by eligibility criteria. As the cost of sequencing decreases, the question of expanding multi-gene cancer panels to a broader population arises. We evaluated how many additional actionable genetic variants are returned by unrestricted panel testing in the private sector compared to those which would be returned by adhering to current NHS eligibility criteria. We reviewed 152 patients referred for multi-gene cancer panels in the private sector between 2014 and 2016. Genetic counselling and disclosure of all results was standard of care provided by the Consultant. Every panel conducted was compared to current eligibility criteria. A germline pathogenic / likely pathogenic variant (P/LP), in a gene relevant to the personal or family history of cancer, was detected in 15 patients (detection rate of 10%). 46.7% of those found to have the P/LP variants (7 of 15), or 4.6% of the entire set (7 of 152), did not fulfil NHS eligibility criteria. 46.7% of P/LP variants in this study would have been missed by national testing guidelines, all of which were actionable. However, patients who do not fulfil eligibility criteria have a higher Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) burden. We demonstrated that the current England NHS threshold for genetic testing is missing pathogenic variants which would alter management in 4.6%, nearly 1 in 20 individuals. However, the clinical service burden that would ensue is a detection of VUS of 34%.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference80 articles.
1. Taylor, A., Brady, A. F,, Frayling, I. M., Hanson, H., Tischkowitz, M., Turnbull, C., Side, L. & Group UKCG. Consensus for genes to be included on cancer panel tests offered by UK genetics services: Guidelines of the UK Cancer Genetics Group. J. Med. Genet. 16, 16. https://doi.org/10.1136/jmedgenet-2017-105188 (2018).
2. Beitsch, P. D. et al. Underdiagnosis of hereditary breast cancer: Are genetic testing guidelines a tool or an obstacle?. J. Clin. Oncol. 37(6), 453–460. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.18.01631 (2019).
3. Samadder, N. J. et al. Comparison of universal genetic testing vs guideline-directed targeted testing for patients with hereditary cancer syndrome. JAMA Oncol. 7(2), 230–237. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.6252 (2021).
4. Whitworth, J. et al. Comprehensive cancer-predisposition gene testing in an adult multiple primary tumor series shows a broad range of deleterious variants and atypical tumor phenotypes. Am. J. Human Genet. 12, 12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.04.013 (2018).
5. National Collaborating Centre for Cancer (UK). Familial Breast Cancer: Classification and Care of People at Risk of Familial Breast Cancer and Management of Breast Cancer and Related Risks in People with a Family History of Breast Cancer. Cardiff (UK): National Collaborating Centre for Cancer (UK); 2013 Jun. (NICE Clinical Guidelines, No. 164.) Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK247567/
Cited by
12 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献