Pathogenic TP53 germline variants cause young-onset breast cancer and other cancers of the Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) spectrum, but the clinical consequences of partial-loss-of function TP53 variants are incompletely understood. In the consecutive cohort of Palestinian breast cancer patients of the Middle East Breast Cancer Study (MEBCS), breast cancer risk among TP53 p.R181C heterozygotes was 50% by age 50 years and 81% by age 80 years. In contrast, prevalence of pediatric cancers in the MEBCS was similar among first-degree relatives of TP53 p.R181C carriers (3/519 = 0.0058) and first-degree relatives of MEBCS patients with no pathogenic germline variant in any known breast cancer gene (7/1082 = 0.0065; odds ratio [OR] = 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.23 to 3.49], Fisher P = .90 [2-tailed]). This result suggests that in families harboring this TP53 allele, genetic testing in children is unwarranted, and screening children for LFS tumors is unnecessary. More generally, some TP53 missense alleles can predispose to very high risk of breast cancer without pleiotropic effects.

This study aimed to evaluate the perceived quality of pre- and post-test explanations given to women carrying BRCA1/2 variants, and to compare these outcomes between two cohorts: female BRCA1/2 carriers identified through self-reported population-based screening (the screening group), in comparison to self-reported formal pre-test genetic counseling due to personal or familial cancer history (genetic counseling group). This cross-sectional survey of female BRCA1/2 carriers employed an anonymous questionnaire distributed through the "Good Genes - a support and information group for BRCA carriers" association from January to March 2023. Main evaluated outcomes included the perceived quality of pre- and post-test explanations, first analyzed in the overall cohort, and then compared between the 110 respondents in the screening group, to 444 women in the counseling group. In the screening group, 45.5% rated the perceived quality of pre-test explanations as unsatisfactory, compared to 27.4% in the genetic counseling group (p = 0.0005). In terms of result delivery, the screening group reported higher instances of inappropriate timing (61.8% vs. 40.3%, p < 0.0001), suboptimal mode of delivery (55.5% vs. 37.5%, p = 0.0008) and suboptimal perceived quality in post-test explanations (51.4% vs. 33.9%, p = 0.0006), as well as elevated stress levels (74.3% vs. 64.3%, p = 0.043). In the screening group, 21.5% of the women reported that the results were communicated by phone, letter, or online notice, compared to 17.2% in the counseling group, a non-statistically significant difference. A logistic regression model controlling for timing and mode of delivery showed that both timing (β = 0.46, p < 0.001) and mode of delivery (β = 0.39, p < 0.001) remained significant predictors of dissatisfaction of post-test counseling. The findings of this survey underscore the pressing need for enhancements in pre-test explanation, as well as the post-test counseling for positive results, especially within the realm of BRCA screening.

In March 2020, a nationwide population carrier screening for BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants among Ashkenazi Jewish women was initiated in Israel. We aimed to assess views regarding the program among professionals who provide oncogenetic counseling for detected carriers.

An online survey was distributed to clinical geneticists and genetic counselors.

The participants' impression was that most carriers did not comprehend the implications of a positive result when deciding to take the test. Some carriers, in retrospect, regretted taking it. Some had a known mutation carrier in the family, and some had a family history that justified a broader test (and so should not have been tested through the screening program). Eight survey participants (29%) reported they were initially against the screening program, but half of them are currently in favor of it. Most participants are unsatisfied with the way the screening is conducted and suggested various improvements. Emotional distress of carriers, as assessed by participants, was higher for those detected by the screening program, compared to those tested after oncogenetic counseling. No association was found between the age, profession, and prior experience of participants and their responses.

While the general attitude toward the screening program is positive, most professionals feel the need to improve the current screening program by defining exclusion criteria, providing comprehensive pretest information and adding other BRCA1/2 founder mutations, as well as expanding the screening to include ethnicities other than Ashkenazi Jews.

Rapid growth in genetic testing usage resulted in declining availability of genetic counselors (GCs) per ordered tests, prolonging the waiting times for face-to-face (F2F) counseling. We evaluated the digital genetic assistant (DGA) for reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) in a real-life clinical setting using a "couple-based" paradigm. The platform provides digital patient intake and automated counseling for low-risk individuals, as well as GC-facing tools that reduce administrative burden in patient-related activities. Among 225 couples undergoing RGCS during the study period, 4% had high-risk results requiring F2F counseling and an additional 4% of low-risk couples requested F2F counseling, suggesting that DGA use reduced GC-participant F2F interactions by 69.3%. GC evaluations revealed that the DGA triaging algorithm was accurate and surveys demonstrated high degrees of user comprehension and satisfaction. These results highlight the utility of digital platforms for patient intake and delivery of low-risk results in settings with limited genetic counseling resources.

Population-based penetrance studies of breast cancer gene 1/2 (BRCA1/2) pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants in the Eastern Chinese population are currently lacking; thus, we aimed to investigate the penetrance of breast cancer and other malignant tumors among BRCA1/2 P/LP variant carriers using a population-based breast cancer cohort from communities in Eastern China.

Between July 2019 and March 2021, we tested 2216 breast cancer probands from Chinese communities for BRCA1/2 mutations and collected detailed information on the age, survival status, and malignancy history of first-degree relatives. The kin-cohort method was used to calculate the penetrance of breast cancer and other malignant tumors.

Of the 2216 breast cancer probands, 109 (4.90%) carried BRCA1/2 P/LP variants, 49 in the BRCA1 gene and 60 in the BRCA2 gene. The penetrance of female breast cancer by 85 years of age was 22.50% and 18.20% in BRCA1 and BRCA2 P/LP variant carriers, respectively. The penetrance of ovarian cancer by 85 years of age was 26.00% in BRCA1 P/LP variant carriers. The penetrance of other malignancies did not reach statistical significance owing to the small number of events.

Our findings showed that breast cancer penetrance among BRCA1 and BRCA2 P/LP variant carriers was 22.50% and 18.20%, respectively, which suggests that prophylactic mastectomy may not be necessary for such Chinese individuals.

ClinicalTrials.gov; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04265937.

The NHS Jewish BRCA Testing Programme is offering germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing to people with ≥1 Jewish grandparent. Who have an increased likelihood of having an Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) founder germline pathogenic variant (gPV) compared with the general population.Testing is offered via a self-referral, home-based saliva sampling pathway, supported by a genetic counsellor telephone helpline. A first-of-its-kind in the United Kingdom (UK) for population genetic testing, outside of research.

We reviewed data from germline testing of 5389 people who registered during the soft-launch phase (January 2023-January 2024) and their families to observe trends in uptake and outcomes of testing.

Of the 5389 self-referrals, 4339 (80.5%) consented to testing. Of those with results returned, 2.3% (98/4,274) had a gPV (89.8% AJ founder and 10.2% non-AJ founder).Notably, the detection rate was higher in men (42/790, 5.3%) compared with women (56/3484, 1.6%), with the proportion reporting known BRCA variants within the family prior to consent also significantly increased (13.1% compared with 9.2%, respectively).

Overall detection rates of gPVs are similar to those reported elsewhere from Jewish population testing. The pathway, particularly for males, may attract uptake of testing by those previously aware of familial gPVs.

As the possibility of implementing population genomic screening programs for the risk of developing hereditary cancers in health systems increases, understanding how to support individuals who wish to have genomic screening is essential. This qualitative study aimed to link public perceived barriers to a) taking up the offer of population genomic screening for breast or prostate cancer risk and b) taking up risk-management options following their result, with possible theory-informed behaviour-change approaches that may support implementation. Ten focus groups were conducted with a total of 25 members of the Australian public to identify and then categorise barriers within the behaviour-change Capability, Opportunity, Motivation - Behaviour (COM-B) model. Ten COM-B categorised barriers were identified as perceived influences on an individual's intentions to take-up the offer, including Capability (e.g., low public awareness), Opportunity (e.g., inconvenient sample collection procedure) and Motivation (e.g., genomic screening not perceived as relevant to an individual). Ten barriers for taking up risk-management options included Motivation (e.g., concerns about adverse health impact) and Opportunity (e.g., social opportunity and cost incurred to the individual). Our findings demonstrate that a nuanced approach is required to support people to take-up the offer of population genomic screening and, where appropriate, to adopt risk-management options. Even amongst participants who were enthusiastic about a population genomic screening program, needs were varied, demanding a range of implementation strategies. Promulgating equitable uptake of genomic screening and management options for breast and prostate cancer risk will require a needs-based approach.

Big data generated from exome sequencing (ES) and genome sequencing (GS) analyses can be used to detect actionable and high-penetrance variants that are not directly associated with the primary diagnosis of patients but can guide their clinical follow-up and treatment. Variants that are classified as pathogenic/likely pathogenic and are clinically significant but not directly associated with the primary diagnosis of patients are defined as secondary findings (SF). The aim of this study was to examine the frequency and variant spectrum of cancer-related SF in 2020 Turkish ES data and to discuss the importance of the presence of cancer-related SF in at-risk family members in terms of genetic counseling and follow-up. A total of 2020 patients from 2020 different families were evaluated by ES. SF were detected in 28 unrelated cases (1.38%), and variants in BRCA2 (11 patients) and MLH1 (4 patients) genes were observed most frequently. A total of 21 different variants were identified, with 4 of them (c.9919_9932del and c.3653del in the BRCA2 gene, c.2002A>G in the MSH2 gene, c.26_29del in the TMEM127 gene) being novel variations. In three different families, c.1189C>T (p.Gln397*) variation in BRCA2 gene was detected, suggesting that this may be a common variant in the Turkish population. This study represents the largest cohort conducted in the Turkish population, examining the frequency and variant spectrum of cancer-related SF. With the identification of frequent variations and the detection of novel variations, the findings of this study have contributed to the variant spectrum. Genetic testing conducted in family members is presented as real-life data, showcasing the implications in terms of counseling, monitoring, and treatment through case examples.

Population-based BRCA testing can identify many more BRCA carriers who will be missed by the current practice of BRCA testing based on family history (FH) and clinical criteria. These carriers can benefit from screening and prevention, potentially preventing many more breast and ovarian cancers and deaths than the current practice.

To estimate the incremental lifetime health outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness associated with population-based BRCA testing compared with FH-based testing in Canada.

For this economic evaluation, a Markov model was developed to compare the lifetime costs and outcomes of BRCA1/BRCA2 testing for all general population women aged 30 years compared with FH-based testing. BRCA carriers are offered risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy to reduce their ovarian cancer risk and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammography screening, medical prevention, and risk-reducing mastectomy to reduce their breast cancer risk. The analyses were conducted from both payer and societal perspectives. This study was conducted from October 1, 2022, to February 20, 2024.

Outcomes of interest were ovarian cancer, breast cancer, additional heart disease deaths, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ICER per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). One-way and probabilistic-sensitivity-analyses (PSA) were undertaken to explore the uncertainty.

In the simulated cohort of 1 000 000 women aged 30 years in Canada, the base case ICERs of population-based BRCA testing were CAD $32 276 (US $23 402.84) per QALY from the payer perspective or CAD $16 416 (US $11 903.00) per QALY from the societal perspective compared with FH-based testing, well below the established Canadian cost-effectiveness thresholds. Population testing remained cost-effective for ages 40 to 60 years but not at age 70 years. The results were robust for multiple scenarios, 1-way sensitivity, and PSA. More than 99% of simulations from payer and societal perspectives were cost-effective on PSA (5000 simulations) at the CAD $50 000 (US $36 254.25) per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. Population-based BRCA testing could potentially prevent an additional 2555 breast cancers and 485 ovarian cancers in the Canadian population, corresponding to averting 196 breast cancer deaths and 163 ovarian cancer deaths per 1 000 000 population.

In this economic evaluation, population-based BRCA testing was cost-effective compared with FH-based testing in Canada from payer and societal perspectives. These findings suggest that changing the genetic testing paradigm to population-based testing could prevent thousands of breast and ovarian cancers.

Improved technologies paired with an increase in access to genetic testing have led to the availability of expanded carrier screening evaluating hundreds of disorders. Currently, most autosomal dominant mutations, such as BRCA1, are not included in expanded carrier assays. Screening pregnant or preconception reproductive-aged women for BRCA1 may present a unique opportunity to perform population-based screening for patients at a time when precancer screening, chemoprevention, and/or risk-reducing surgery may be beneficial.

This study aimed to inform clinical decision-making as to whether the universal incorporation of BRCA1 testing at the time of obstetrical prenatal carrier screening is cost-effective.

A decision analysis and Markov model was created. The initial decision point in the model was BRCA1 testing at the time of expanded carrier screening. Model probabilities, cost, and utility values were derived from published literature. For BRCA1-positive patients, the model simulated breast cancer screening and risk-reducing surgical interventions. A cycle length of 1 year and a time horizon of 47 years were used to simulate the lifespan of patients. The setting was obstetrical clinics in the United States, and the participants were a theoretical cohort of 1,429,074 pregnant patients who annually underwent expanded carrier screening.

Among our cohort, BRCA1 testing resulted in the identification of an additional 3716 BRCA1-positive patients, the prevention of 1394 breast and ovarian cancer cases, and 1084 fewer deaths. BRCA1 testing was a cost-effective strategy compared with no BRCA1 testing with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $86,001 per quality-adjusted life years. In a 1-way sensitivity analysis, we varied the prevalence of BRCA1 in the population from 0.00% to 20.00% and found that BRCA1 testing continued to be the cost-effective strategy until the prevalence rate was reduced to 0.16%. Multiple additional sensitivity analyses did not substantially affect the cost-effectiveness.

The addition of BRCA1 testing to obstetrical prenatal carrier screening is a cost-effective management strategy to identify at-risk women at a time when cancer screening and preventive strategies can be effective. Despite the burden of additional genetic counseling, prenatal care represents a unique opportunity to implement population-based genetic testing.

Cancer susceptibility syndromes confer an increased lifetime risk of cancer and occur due to germline likely-pathogenic or pathogenic variants in a cancer susceptibility gene. Clinical Genetics services advise patients of ways to manage their future cancer risks, often prefaced with uncertainties due to poor understandings of individualised risk. For individuals/couples whose future offspring are at risk of a cancer susceptibility syndrome, different options are available depending on their preferences and circumstances, including prenatal diagnosis and preimplantation genetic testing. This review provides an overview of the most common cancer susceptibility syndromes, available reproductive options and a genetic counselling framework recommended to support individuals/couples in their decision-making. We describe complexities of decision-making involving moderate penetrance and sex-specific variable penetrance genes and explore associated ethical issues arising in this complex area of medicine.

Several international groups have published guidelines to identify low-risk breast cancer (BC) patients who are eligible for partial breast irradiation (PBI). These include the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and ESTRO subgroups such as the Intraoperative radiation (IORT) Task Force and Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie (GEC) -ESTRO. Only ASTRO guidelines recommend against the use of PBI in known carriers of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1/2. The aim of this study was to evaluate the proportion of BC patients, subsequently found to be BRCA1/2 PV carriers who would be eligible for PBI based on clinical-pathologic criteria of the above-mentioned international guidelines.

Data were extracted from the medical records of consecutive BC BRCA1/2 PV carriers treated at a single institution between 2006 and 2023. Data included patient demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment, and disease outcomes.

Overall, 498 patients with 518 primary tumors were analyzed. Of these, 282 (12 of them with synchronous bilateral disease) presented with unknown genetic status at diagnosis and formed the study cohort. The median age at diagnosis was 42.7 years (range, 23.8-77.9). Based on the recent ASTRO guidelines (not including conditionally recommended criteria), 17 of 294 (5.8%) of the carriers had tumors that would be eligible for PBI, including 3 Her2-positive tumors and 5 patients diagnosed between ages 40 and 49 years. Using the ESTRO IORT and the ACROP-ESTRO PBI criteria, 9 of 294 (3%) would be eligible, whereas with the GEC-ESTRO low-risk criteria, 31 of 294 (10.5%) of the carriers would be eligible, and their intermediate risk criteria would increase eligibility for PBI by an additional 8.2% (overall 18.7%).

Using clinical-pathologic criteria published in international guidelines, 3% to 18% of BRCA1/2 PV carriers will have tumors eligible for PBI. Therefore, especially in populations who are at high risk for being BRCA1/2 PV carriers, we recommend adhering to stricter guidelines. In our cohort, ASTRO, ESTRO-IORT, and ESTRO PBI had the lowest probability of identifying BRCA1/2 PV carriers as eligible for PBI.

Recent genetic and genomic advancements have elucidated the complex etiology of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and other progressive fibrotic interstitial lung diseases (ILDs), emphasizing the contribution of heritable factors. This state-of-the-art review synthesizes evidence on significant genetic contributors to pulmonary fibrosis (PF), including rare genetic variants and common SNPs. The MUC5B promoter variant is unusual, a common SNP that markedly elevates the risk of early and established PF. We address the utility of genetic variation in enhancing understanding of disease pathogenesis and clinical phenotypes, improving disease definitions, and informing prognosis and treatment response. Critical research gaps are highlighted, particularly the underrepresentation of non-European ancestries in PF genetic studies and the exploration of PF phenotypes beyond usual interstitial pneumonia/IPF. We discuss the role of telomere length, often critically short in PF, and its link to progression and mortality, underscoring the genetic complexity involving telomere biology genes (TERT, TERC) and others like SFTPC and MUC5B. In addition, we address the potential of gene-by-environment interactions to modulate disease manifestation, advocating for precision medicine in PF. Insights from gene expression profiling studies and multiomic analyses highlight the promise for understanding disease pathogenesis and offer new approaches to clinical care, therapeutic drug development, and biomarker discovery. Finally, we discuss the ethical, legal, and social implications of genomic research and therapies in PF, stressing the need for sound practices and informed clinical genetic discussions. Looking forward, we advocate for comprehensive genetic testing panels and polygenic risk scores to improve the management of PF and related ILDs across diverse populations.

Population-wide genomic screening for genes that have high penetrance and clinical actionability enhances the opportunity to identify individuals at risk for developing hereditary conditions. Organizational readiness has been shown to influence the likelihood of successful implementation of complex initiatives such as the integration of population-wide genomic screening in clinical settings. We use the organizational readiness heuristic R = MC2 to better understand three factors that influence readiness for implementation of In Our DNA SC, a population-wide genomic screening program: motivation to implement, general capacity of an organization, and innovation-specific capacities. We then assessed the influence of these readiness factors on implementation outcomes of reach (measured through enrollment rate) and implementation (measured through the number of DNA samples collected). Data were collected pre-implementation and captured during the three-month pilot phase of the In Our DNA SC program. We collected administrative data from the electronic health record and quantitatively captured elements of readiness through surveys distributed to provider champions and clinical administrative champions at the 10 sites implementing the population-wide genomic screening program. We facilitated innovation-specific capacity through training offered at each site, as well as technical assistance through weekly meetings with other implementing sites, and resources available to all staff. Forty percent of provider champions attended training and 80% of administrative champions attended training. An average of 3.7 additional staff were trained at each implementing site. Satisfaction with training positively influenced reach (β = 0.0121, p = 0.0271) but did not impact implementation. Provider engagement (innovation capabilities) was associated with reach (β = 0.0020, p = 0.0251) and clinical administrator engagement was associated with sample collection rate (β = 0.2599, β = 0.038). Readiness to change is considered one of the most important factors in understanding the potential opportunity for implementation. We found that motivation to adopt a population-wide genomic screening program positively impacted the program's reach. The type of champion influenced discrete outcomes, with provider champions positively impacting reach and administrative champions influencing implementation (assessed through sample collection rate). As genomics continues to be integrated into clinical practice, it will be important to understand the contextual factors that influence readiness for implementation and design support throughout the life-course of implementation to ensure the success of large-scale, complex initiatives.

Background: Population-based cancer registries are the best source of information to measure cancer burden. However, little is done to use this information for individual cancer risk assessment. In this study, we aimed at identifying women at high risk of breast and ovarian cancer using data on family history of cancer from the Israel national cancer registry. Methods: We used the family history assessment tool (FHAT) to score all females, 26 to 45 years of age, in a 2.6-million-member health provider in Israel (Maccabi Healthcare Services). Data on breast, ovarian, prostate, and pancreatic cancer history among the participants and their parents (identified using the national census) were retrieved from the national cancer registry. These data were used to calculate individual FHAT scores. Results: A total of 377,931 eligible women were included in the analysis. A relevant family history of cancer was detected in 20,386 (5.4%), with FHAT scores ranging from 1 to 16. FHAT score was higher in older women and among those with a history of breast cancer. Among women aged 35-39, an FHAT score of 10 or above was associated with an OR of 15.23 (95%CI: 7.41-28.19) for breast cancer compared to women with an FHAT of 0. Conclusions: Using individual-level data from national cancer registries may assist in detecting women with a relevant family history of cancer.

1 in 40 UK Jewish individuals carry a pathogenic variant in BRCA1/BRCA2. Traditional testing criteria miss half of carriers, and so population genetic testing is being piloted for Jewish people in England. There has been no qualitative research into the factors influencing BRCA awareness and testing experience in this group. This study aimed to explore these and inform improvements for the implementation of population genetic testing.

Qualitative study of UK Jewish adults who have undergone BRCA testing. We conducted one-to-one semistructured interviews via telephone or video call using a predefined topic guide, until sufficient information power was reached. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and interpreted using applied thematic analysis.

32 individuals were interviewed (28 carriers, 4 non-carriers). We interpreted five themes intersecting across six time points of the testing pathway: (1) individual differences regarding personal/family history of cancer, demographics and personal attitudes/approach; (2) healthcare professionals' support; (3) pathway access and integration; (4) nature of family/partner relationships; and (5) Jewish community factors. Testing was largely triggered by connecting information to a personal/family history of cancer. No participants reported decision regret, although there was huge variation in satisfaction. Suggestions were given around increasing UK Jewish community awareness, making information and support services personally relevant and proactive case management of carriers.

There is a need to improve UK Jewish community BRCA awareness and to highlight personal relevance of testing for individuals without a personal/family history of cancer. Traditional testing criteria caused multiple issues regarding test access and experience. Carriers want information and support services tailored to their individual circumstances.

Women who inherit a pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation are at substantially higher risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer than average. Several cancer risk management strategies exist to address this increased risk. Decisions about which strategies to choose are complex, personal and multifactorial for these women. Decision aids (DAs) are tools that assist patients in making health-related decisions. The aim of this scoping review was to map evidence relating to the development and testing of patient DAs for cancer unaffected BRCA mutation carriers.

Scoping review conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute's (JBI's) scoping review methodological framework.

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science. No restrictions applied for language or publication date. A manual search was also performed.

Studies on DAs for cancer risk management designed for or applicable to women with a pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation who are unaffected by breast or ovarian cancer.

Data were extracted using a form based on the JBI instrument for extracting details of studies' characteristics and results. Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers. Extracted data were tabulated.

32 evidence sources relating to development or testing of 21 DAs were included. Four DAs were developed exclusively for cancer unaffected BRCA mutation carriers. Of these, two covered all guideline recommended risk management strategies for this population though only one of these was readily available publicly in its full version. All studies investigating DA effectiveness reported a positive effect of the DA under investigation on at least one of the outcomes evaluated, however only six DAs were tested in randomised controlled trials.

This scoping review has mapped the landscape of the literature relating to developing and testing, DAs applicable to cancer unaffected BRCA mutation carriers.

Olaparib was the first poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor approved for patients with cancer with mutations in either BRCA1 or BRCA2 in China. To the best of our knowledge, however, no study has described the efficacy of olaparib for patients with breast cancer with double mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. The present case report describes a patient with breast cancer with deleterious germline mutations in both BRCA1 and BRCA2. The 56-year-old patient with multiple metastatic breast cancer underwent breast cancer resection with 12 years interval between removal of the left and right breast. Germline mutations in both BRCA1 (S405X) and BRCA2 (W2990X) were identified by NGS. She received two cycles of chemotherapy with a combination of albumin-bound paclitaxel and capecitabine; the response was progressive disease. Subsequently, the patient was treated with a gradual dosage of decreasing olaparib (600 to 300 mg BID) for 6 months until grade 3 anemia could not be alleviated by giving erythropoietin and iron, and CT imaging showed a partial response (35% reduction). The patient then switched to exemestane therapy due to the continuous grade 3 anemia. In conclusion, the present study reported a female patient with double heterozygosity of BRCA1 and BRCA2 who benefited from olaparib monotherapy. Thus, olaparib may be a suitable treatment for such patients.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations are responsible for a higher incidence of breast and ovarian cancer (from 55% up to 70% vs. 12% in the general population). If their functions have been widely investigated in the onset of these malignancies, still little is known about their role in fertility impairment. Cancer patients treated with antineoplastic drugs can be susceptible to their gonadotoxicity and, in women, some of them can induce apoptotic program in premature ovarian follicles, progressive depletion of ovarian reserve and, consequently, cancer treatment-related infertility (CTRI). BRCA variants seem to be associated with early infertility, thus accelerating treatment impairment of ovaries and making women face the concrete possibility of an early pregnancy. In this regard, fertility preservation (FP) procedures should be discussed in oncofertility counseling-from the first line of prevention with risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) to the new experimental ovarian stem cells (OSCs) model as a new way to obtain in vitro-differentiated oocytes, several techniques may represent a valid option to BRCA-mutated patients. In this review, we revisit knowledge about BRCA involvement in lower fertility, pregnancy feasibility, and the fertility preservation (FP) options available.

Halacha is the corpus of Jewish law which serves as a life blueprint for observant Jewish individuals. Health professionals counseling halachically observant populations at risk for breast cancer gene (BRCA) mutations should be well informed of the halachic approach to screening for BRCA mutations and subsequent interventions.

To address the intersection of halacha with ethical norms and current medical evidence-based data as they relate to potential and identified BRCA mutation carriers at their various stages of decision-making.

Halacha, ethics, and medicine have much in common, but there are specific principles which guide halacha; decision-making in light of halacha is complex and varies with respect to the multi-faceted aspects of screening and intervention. Halacha encourages the exercise of autonomy regarding situations in which beneficence is not clear-cut and dependent on subjective perceptions.

Health professionals knowledgeable of halacha are better equipped to counsel the observant Jewish population at risk of BRCA mutations or identified as mutation carriers, enabling them to present targeted questions to halachic authorities and thus achieve optimal decision-making.

A relevant percentage of breast cancers (BCs) are tied to pathogenetic (P)/likely pathogenetic (LP) variants in predisposing genes. The knowledge of P/LP variants is an essential element in the management of BC patients since the first diagnosis because it influences surgery and subsequent oncological treatments and follow-up. Moreover, patients with metastatic BCs can benefit from personalized treatment if carriers of P/LP in BRCA1/2 genes. Multigene panels allow the identification of other predisposing genes with an impact on management. Cascade genetic testing for healthy family members allows personalized preventive strategies. Here, we review the advances and the challenges of Cancer Genetic Counseling (CGC). We focus on the area of oncology directed to hereditary BC management describing the peculiar way to lead CGC and how CGC changes over time. The authors describe the impact of genetic testing by targeted approach or universal approach on the management of BC according to the stage at diagnosis. Moreover, they describe the burden of CGC and testing and future perspectives to widely offer testing. A new perspective is needed for models of service delivery of CGC and testing, beyond formal genetic counselling. A broader genetic test can be quickly usable in clinical practice for comprehensive BC management and personalized prevention in the era of precision oncology.

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer affecting women globally. Genetic testing serves as a prevention and treatment strategy for managing BC. This study aims to systematically review economic evaluations and the quality of selected studies involving genetic screening strategies for BC in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).

A search was performed to identify related articles that were published up to April 2023 on PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Only English-language LMIC studies were included. Synthesis of studies characteristics, methodological and data input variations, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and reporting quality (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklist) were performed.

This review found five pertinent studies, mainly focusing on economic evaluations of germline genetic testing in upper-middle-income countries (Upper MICs) like Malaysia, China, and Brazil. Only one study covered multiple countries with varying incomes, including lower-middle-income nations (Lower MICs) like India. The ICERs values in various screening scenarios for early-stage BC, HER2 negative BC patients, and healthy women with clinical or family history criteria were ranging from USD 2214/QALY to USD 36,342/QALY. Multigene testing for all breast cancer patients with cascade testing was at USD 7729/QALY compared to BRCA alone. Most studies adhered to the CHEERS 2022 criteria, signifying high methodological quality.

Germline testing could be considered as cost-effective compared to no testing in Upper MICs (e.g., Malaysia, China, Brazil) but not in Lower MICs (e.g., India) based on the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold set by each respective study. Limitations prevent a definite conclusion about cost-effectiveness across LMICs. More high-quality studies are crucial for informed decision-making and improved healthcare practices in these regions.

The current method of BRCA testing for breast and ovarian cancer prevention, which is based on family history, often fails to identify many carriers of pathogenic variants. Population-based genetic testing offers a transformative approach in cancer prevention by allowing for proactive identification of any high-risk individuals and enabling early interventions.

To assess the lifetime incremental effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of population-based multigene testing vs family history-based testing.

This economic evaluation used a microsimulation model to assess the cost-effectiveness of multigene testing (BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2) for all women aged 30 to 35 years compared with the current standard of care that is family history based. Carriers of pathogenic variants were offered interventions, such as magnetic resonance imaging with or without mammography, chemoprevention, or risk-reducing mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy, to reduce cancer risk. A total of 2000 simulations were run on 1 000 000 women, using a lifetime time horizon and payer perspective, and costs were adjusted to 2022 US dollars. This study was conducted from September 1, 2020, to December 15, 2023.

The main outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), quantified as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Secondary outcomes included incremental cost, additional breast and ovarian cancer cases prevented, and excess deaths due to coronary heart disease (CHD).

The study assessed 1 000 000 simulated women aged 30 to 35 years in the US. In the base case, population-based multigene testing was more cost-effective compared with family history-based testing, with an ICER of $55 548 per QALY (95% CI, $47 288-$65 850 per QALY). Population-based multigene testing would be able to prevent an additional 1338 cases of breast cancer and 663 cases of ovarian cancer, but it would also result in 69 cases of excess CHD and 10 excess CHD deaths per million women. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses show that the probability that population-based multigene testing is cost-effective was 100%. When the cost of the multigene test exceeded $825, population-based testing was no longer cost-effective (ICER, $100 005 per QALY; 95% CI, $87 601-$11 6323).

In this economic analysis of population-based multigene testing, population-based testing was a more cost-effective strategy for the prevention of breast cancer and ovarian cancer when compared with the current family history-based testing strategy at the $100 000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. These findings support the need for more comprehensive genetic testing strategies to identify pathogenic variant carriers and enable informed decision-making for personalized risk management.

Women in the United States who continue to face obstacles accessing health care are frequently termed an underserved population. Safety-net health care systems play a crucial role in mitigating health disparities and reducing burdens of disease, such as breast cancer, for underserved women. Disparities in health care are driven by various factors, including race and ethnicity, as well as socioeconomic factors that affect education, employment, housing, insurance status, and access to health care. Underserved women are more likely to be uninsured or underinsured throughout their lifetimes. Hence they have greater difficulty gaining access to breast cancer screening and are less likely to undergo supplemental imaging when needed. Therefore, underserved women often experience significant delays in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer, leading to higher mortality rates. Addressing disparities requires a multifaceted approach, with formal care coordination to help at-risk women navigate through screening, diagnosis, and treatment. Mobile mammography units and community outreach programs can be leveraged to increase community access and engagement, as well as improve health literacy with educational initiatives. Radiology-community partnerships, comprised of imaging practices partnered with local businesses, faith-based organizations, homeless shelters, and public service departments, are essential to establish culturally competent breast imaging care, with the goal of equitable access to early diagnosis and contemporary treatment. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Test Your Knowledge questions are available in the Online Learning Center. See the invited commentary by Leung in this issue.

We sought to investigate how penetrance of familial cancer syndromes varies with family history using a population-based cohort.

We analysed 454,712 UK Biobank participants with exome sequence and clinical data (data collected between March 2006 and June 2021). We identified participants with a self-reported family history of breast or colorectal cancer and a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant in the major genes responsible for hereditary breast cancer or Lynch syndrome. We calculated survival to cancer diagnosis (controlled for sex, death, recruitment centre, screening and prophylactic surgery).

Women with a pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 variant had an increased risk of breast cancer that was higher in those with a first-degree family history (relative hazard 10.3 and 7.8, respectively) than those without (7.2 and 4.7). Penetrance to age 60 was also higher in those with a family history (44.7%, CI 32.2-59.3 and 24.1%, CI 17.5-32.6) versus those without (22.8%, CI 15.9-32.0 and 17.9%, CI 13.8-23.0). A similar pattern was seen in Lynch syndrome: individuals with a pathogenic MLH1, MSH2 or MSH6 variant had an increased risk of colorectal cancer that was significantly higher in those with a family history (relative hazard 35.6, 48.0 and 9.9) than those without (13.0, 15.4 and 7.2). Penetrance to age 60 was also higher for carriers of a pathogenic MLH1 or MSH2 variant in those with a family history (30.9%, CI 18.1-49.3 and 38.3%, CI 21.5-61.8) versus those without (20.5% CI 9.6-40.5 and 8.3% CI 2.1-30.4), but not for MSH6 (6.5% CI 2.7-15.1 with family history versus 8.3%, CI 5.1-13.2). Relative risk increases were also observed both within and across conditions.

Individuals with pathogenic cancer syndrome variants may be at a less elevated risk of cancer in the absence of a first-degree family history, so in the context of results return, family history should be considered when counselling patients on the risks and benefits of potential follow-up care.

The current work is supported by the MRC (grant no MR/T00200X/1). The MRC had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Genetic counseling and testing have an important role in the care of patients at elevated risk for breast cancer. However, conventional pre- and post-test genetic counseling is labor and time intensive, less accessible for patients living outside major urban centers, and impractical on a large scale. A patient-driven approach to genetic counseling and testing may increase access, improve patients' experiences, affect efficiency of clinical practice, and help meet workforce demand. The objective of this 2-arm randomized controlled trial is to determine the efficacy of Know Your Risk (KYR), a genetic counseling patient preference intervention.

Females (n = 1000) at elevated risk (>20% lifetime) for breast cancer will be randomized to the KYR intervention or conventional genetic counseling. The study will provide comprehensive assessment of breast cancer risk by multigene panel testing and validated polygenic risk score. Primary outcome is adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for a clinical encounter every 6-12 months and an annual mammogram (breast MRI if recommended) determined by medical record review. Secondary outcomes include adherence to other recommended cancer screening tests determined by medical record review and changes in breast cancer knowledge, perception of risk, post-test/counseling distress, and satisfaction with counseling by completion of three surveys during the study. Study aims will be evaluated for non-inferiority of the KYR intervention compared to conventional genetic counseling.

If efficacious, the KYR intervention has the potential to improve patients' experience and may change how genetic counseling is delivered, inform best practices, and reduce workforce burden.

ClinicalTrials.govNCT05325151.

As the uptake of population screening expands, assessment of medical and psychosocial outcomes is needed. Through the Alabama Genomic Health Initiative (AGHI), a state-funded genomic research program, individuals received screening for pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in 59 actionable genes via genotyping. Of the 3874 eligible participants that received screening results, 858 (22%) responded to an outcomes survey. The most commonly reported motivation for seeking testing through AGHI was contribution to genetic research (64%). Participants with positive results reported a higher median number of planned actions (median = 5) due to AGHI results as compared to negative results (median = 3). Interviews were conducted with survey participants with positive screening results. As determined by certified genetic counselors, 50% of interviewees took appropriate medical action based on their result. There were no negative or harmful actions taken. These findings indicate population genomic screening of an unselected adult population is feasible, is not harmful, and may have positive outcomes on participants now and in the future; however, further research is needed in order to assess clinical utility.

The aim of the study was to evaluate the results of a large-scale BRCA1/2 carrier screening program among Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) women.

We performed a cross-sectional study of women who were eligible for BRCA1/2 screening program. Women who self-reported as complete or partial AJ were screened for 14 pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 genes, following the Israeli Ministry of Health's national screening program.

The study included 13,502 women who underwent screening between June 2020 and June 2022. The prevalence of the pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 was 0.89% (120 of 13,502) among the tested women. Of the 14 variants tested, only 6 variants were detected. Three variants, known as the founder variants among AJ, accounted for 96.6% of identified variants (NM_000059.4(BRCA2):c.5946del, p.(Ser1982fs); NM_007294.4(BRCA1):c.68_69del, p.(Glu23fs); NM_007294.4(BRCA1):c.5266dup, p.(Gln1756fs)). The tested women were younger and of a higher socioeconomic status compared with the eligible non-tested women.

The study provides a new insight into a large carrier screening program for BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants in AJ women in Israel. These findings present real-world prevalence of women who are heterozygous for BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants in AJ population and the importance of such programs.

In early 1995, I established the oncogenetics service at the Genetics Institute of the Sheba Medical Center in Israel. The purpose of this article is to describe the key points and issues that were raised throughout my personal journey since then: physician and public awareness; ethical and legal issues; guidelines for oncogenetic counseling; the development of oncogenetic testing within the unique Israeli reality of the limited spectrum of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations; high-risk vs. population screening; and the definition and implementation of guidelines for surveillance of asymptomatic mutation carriers. Since 1995, oncogenetics has been transformed from a rare oddity to a pivotal player, and it represents a successful example of implementing personalized preventive medicine by identifying and providing care and by offering means for early detection and risk reduction for adults who are genetically predisposed to develop a potentially life-threatening disease-cancer in this case. Lastly, I outline my personal vision for the possible way forward for oncogenetics.

Population screening for genetic risk of adult-onset preventable conditions has been proposed as an attractive public health intervention. Screening unselected individuals can identify many individuals who will not be identified through current genetic testing guidelines.

We sought to evaluate enrollment in and diagnostic yield of population genetic screening in a resource-limited setting among a diverse population. We developed a low-cost, short-read next-generation sequencing panel of 25 genes that had 98.4% sensitivity and 99.98% specificity compared to diagnostic panels. We used email invitations to recruit a diverse cohort of patients in the University of Washington Medical Center system unselected for personal or family history of hereditary disease. Participants were sent a saliva collection kit in the mail with instructions on kit use and return. Results were returned using a secure online portal. Enrollment and diagnostic yield were assessed overall and across race and ethnicity groups.

Overall, 40,857 people were invited and 2889 (7.1%) enrolled. Enrollment varied across race and ethnicity groups, with the lowest enrollment among African American individuals (3.3%) and the highest among Multiracial or Other Race individuals (13.0%). Of 2864 enrollees who received screening results, 106 actionable variants were identified in 103 individuals (3.6%). Of those who screened positive, 30.1% already knew about their results from prior genetic testing. The diagnostic yield was 74 new, actionable genetic findings (2.6%). The addition of more recently identified cancer risk genes increased the diagnostic yield of screening.

Population screening can identify additional individuals that could benefit from prevention, but challenges in recruitment and sample collection will reduce actual enrollment and yield. These challenges should not be overlooked in intervention planning or in cost and benefit analysis.

Pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) in certain genes are linked to higher lifetime risk of developing breast cancer and can influence preventive surgery decisions and therapy choices. Public health programs offer genetic screening based on criteria designed to assess personal risk and identify individuals more likely to carry PGVs, dividing patients into screened and non-screened groups. How tumor biology and clinicopathological characteristics differ between these groups is understudied and could guide refinement of screening criteria.

Six thousand six hundred sixty breast cancer patients diagnosed in South Sweden during 2010-2018 were included with available clinicopathological and RNA sequencing data, 900 (13.5%) of which had genes screened for PGVs through routine clinical screening programs. We compared characteristics of screened patients and tumors to non-screened patients, as well as between screened patients with (n = 124) and without (n = 776) PGVs.

Broadly, breast tumors in screened patients showed features of a more aggressive disease. However, few differences related to tumor biology or patient outcome remained significant after stratification by clinical subgroups or PAM50 subtypes. Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), the subgroup most enriched for PGVs, showed the most differences between screening subpopulations (e.g., higher tumor proliferation in screened cases). Significant differences in PGV prevalence were found between clinical subgroups/molecular subtypes, e.g., TNBC cases were enriched for BRCA1 PGVs. In general, clinicopathological differences between screened and non-screened patients mimicked those between patients with and without PGVs, e.g., younger age at diagnosis for positive cases. However, differences in tumor biology/microenvironment such as immune cell composition were additionally seen within PGV carriers/non-carriers in ER + /HER2 - cases, but not between screening subpopulations in this subgroup.

Characterization of molecular tumor features in patients clinically screened and not screened for PGVs represents a relevant read-out of guideline criteria. The general lack of molecular differences between screened/non-screened patients after stratification by relevant breast cancer subsets questions the ability to improve the identification of screening candidates based on currently used patient and tumor characteristics, pointing us towards universal screening. Nevertheless, while that is not attained, molecular differences identified between PGV carriers/non-carriers suggest the possibility of further refining patient selection within certain patient subsets using RNA-seq through, e.g., gene signatures.

The Sweden Cancerome Analysis Network - Breast (SCAN-B) was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under the identifier NCT02306096.

Pathogenic BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) variation is the genetic predisposition for high cancer risk affecting mostly breast and ovarian. BRCA variation information is widely used in clinical diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of BRCA-related cancer. The positive selection imposed on human BRCA leads to highly ethnic-specific BRCA variation to adapt different living environment on earth. Most of the human BRCA variants identified so far were from the European descendant populations and used as the standard reference for global human populations, whereas BRCA variation in other ethnic populations remains poorly characterized. This review addresses the origin of ethnic-specific BRCA variation, the importance of ethnic-specific BRCA variation in clinical application, the limitation of current BRCA variation data, and potential solutions to fill the gap.

Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) people have a higher incidence of BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs) than unselected populations. Three BRCA-Jewish founder mutations (B-JFMs) comprise >90% of BRCA1/2 PVs in AJ people. Personal/family cancer history-based testing misses ≥50% of people with B-JFM.

We compared two population-based B-JFM screening programmes in Australia-using (1) an online tool (Sydney) and (2) in-person group sessions (Melbourne).

Of 2167 Jewish people tested (Sydney n=594; Melbourne n=1573), 1.3% (n=28) have a B-JFM, only 2 of whom had a significant cancer family history (Manchester score ≥12). Pretest anxiety scores were normal (mean 9.9±3.5 (6-24)), with no significant post-result change (9.5±3.3). Decisional regret (mean 7.4±13.0 (0-100)), test-related distress (mean 0.8+/2.2 (0-30)) and positive experiences (reverse-scored) (mean 3.4±4.5 (1-20)) scores were low, with no significant differences between Sydney and Melbourne participants. Post-education knowledge was good overall (mean 11.8/15 (±2.9)) and significantly higher in Melbourne than Sydney. Post-result knowledge was the same (mean 11.7 (±2.4) vs 11.2 (±2.4)). Participants with a B-JFM had higher post-result anxiety and test-related distress and lower positive experiences, than those without a B-JFM, but scores were within the normal range. Family cancer history did not significantly affect knowledge or anxiety, or pretest perception of B-JFM or cancer risks. Most participants (93%) were satisfied/very satisfied with the programme.

Both B-JFM screening programmes are highly acceptable to Australian Jewish communities. The programme enabled identification of several individuals who were previously unaware they have a B-JFM, many of whom would have been ineligible for current criteria-based testing in Australia.

There have been many surveys of genetic variation in BRCA1 and BRCA2 to identify variant prevalence and catalogue population specific variants, yet none have evaluated the magnitude of unobserved variation. We applied species richness estimation methods from ecology to estimate "variant richness" and determine how many germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants have yet to be identified and the frequency of these missing variants in different populations. We also estimated the prevalence of germline pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants and identified those expected to be most common. Data was obtained from a literature search including studies conducted globally that tested the entirety of BRCA1/2 for pathogenic variation. Across countries, 45% to 88% of variants were estimated to be missing, i.e., present in the population but not observed in study data. Estimated variant frequencies in each country showed a higher proportion of rare variants compared to recurrent variants. The median prevalence estimate of BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers was 0.64%. BRCA1 c.68_69del is likely the most recurrent BRCA1/2 variant globally due to its estimated prevalence in India. Modeling variant richness using ecology methods may assist in evaluating clinical targeted assays by providing a picture of what is observed with estimates of what is still unknown.