Search

ImportancePatients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) are at markedly increased risk for duodenal adenomas and cancer. Combination sulindac and erlotinib was previously shown to reduce duodenal polyp burden but was associated with a relatively high adverse event (AE) rate. Objective: To evaluate if a once weekly dosing schedule for erlotinib intervention improves the AE profile, while still providing efficacy with respect to reduced polyp burden, in participants with FAP. Design, setting and participants: Single-arm trial, enrolling 46 participants with FAP, conducted from October 2017 to September 2019 in eight academic cancer centres.ExposuresParticipants self-administered 350 mg of erlotinib by mouth, one time per week for 6 months. Main outcomes and measures: Duodenal polyp burden (sum of polyp diameters) was assessed in the proximal duodenum by esophagogastroduodenoscopy performed at baseline and 6 months, with mean per cent change defined as the primary efficacy outcome of interest. Rate of grade 2–3 AEs was evaluated as a co-primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included changes in total duodenal polyp count, along with changes in lower gastrointestinal (GI) polyp burden and count (for participants examined by optional lower endoscopy).ResultsForty-six participants (mean age, 44.1 years (range, 18–68); women, 22 (48%)) were enrolled; 42 participants completed 6 months of intervention and were included in the per-protocol analysis. Duodenal polyp burden was significantly reduced after 6 months of weekly erlotinib intervention, with a mean per cent change of −29.6% (95% CI, −39.6% to −19.7%; pConclusionIn this single-arm, multi-centre trial of participants with FAP, erlotinib one time per week resulted in markedly lower duodenal polyp burden, and modestly reduced lower GI polyp burden, after 6 months of intervention. While AEs were still reported by nearly three-quarters of all participants, these events were generally lower grade and well-tolerated. These findings support further investigation of erlotinib as an effective, acceptable cancer preventive agent for FAP-associated GI polyposis.Trial registration numberNCT02961374.

Prior small reports have postulated a link between gastrointestinal polyposis and childhood and young adulthood cancer (CYAC) treatment (therapy-associated polyposis; TAP), but this remains a poorly understood phenomenon. The aim of this study was to describe the phenotypic spectrum of TAP in a multi-institutional cohort. TAP cases were identified from eight high-risk cancer centers. Cases were defined as patients with ≥10 gastrointestinal polyps without known causative germline alteration or hereditary colorectal cancer predisposition syndrome who had a history of prior treatment with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy for CYAC. A total of 34 TAP cases were included (original CYAC: 27 Hodgkin lymphoma, three neuroblastoma, one acute myeloid leukemia, one medulloblastoma, one nephroblastoma, and one non-Hodgkin lymphoma). Gastrointestinal polyposis was first detected at a median of 27 years (interquartile range, 20–33) after CYAC treatment. A total of 12 of 34 (35%) TAP cases had ≥50 colorectal polyps. A total of 32 of 34 (94%) had >1 histologic polyp type. A total of 25 of 34 (74%) had clinical features suggestive of ≥1 colorectal cancer predisposition syndrome [e.g., attenuated familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), serrated polyposis syndrome, extracolonic manifestations of FAP, mismatch repair–deficient colorectal cancer, or hamartomatous polyposis] including 8 of 34 (24%) with features of multiple such syndromes. TAP is an apparently acquired phenomenon that should be considered in patients who develop significant polyposis without known causative germline alteration but who have had prior treatment for a CYAC. Patients with TAP have features that may mimic various hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes, suggesting multiple concurrent biologic mechanisms, and recognition of this diagnosis may have implications for cancer risk and screening.

Supplementary Tables S1 - S12. Supplementary Table S1. Prioritization of candidate FPC susceptibility genes by private heterozygous PTVs. Supplementary Table S2. FPC patients harboring a private PTVs ASXL1, DNMT3A, and TET2. Supplementary Table S3. 87 genes analyzed in-depth in FPC patients and kindreds. Supplementary Table S4. Deleterious variants in FPC patients and kindreds. Supplementary Table S5. FPC samples with more than one deleterious variant. Supplementary Table S6. Deleterious variants in BCCS samples. Supplementary Table S7. Deleterious variants in FPC kindreds and BCCS samples. Supplementary Table S8. Differences in deleterious variants between FPC kindreds with three or more affected members and BCCS samples. Supplementary Table S9. Private heterozygous PTVs present in all sequenced affected members of a kindred. Supplementary Table S10. Deleterious variants shared between affected members of an FPC kindred. Supplementary Table S11. Somatic mutations in FPC patient tumors. Supplementary Table S12. Summary of somatic mutation data for FPC patient tumors by gene.

Supplementary Table 3 shows types of surgical resection

Supplementary Table 1 shows number of TAP cases per site

Supplementary Table 2 shows individual case-level data (clinical history, genetic testing, secondary cancers)

CCR Translation for This Article from Colorectal Cancers with Microsatellite Instability Display Unique miRNA Profiles

PDF file - 54K

XLS file - 451K

XLS file - 123K

PDF file - 14K

PDF file - 980K

Public health genomics prioritizes effective and ethical translation of genomic science into population health precision medicine. With the rapid development of cost-effective, next-generation genome sequencing, calls are growing for greater inclusion of Black people in genomic research, policy, and practice. Genetic testing is often the first step in precision medicine. This study explores racial differences in patient concerns about genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer. Employing a community-based participatory mixed methods research design, we developed a semi-structured survey that was shared broadly. There were 81 survey respondents, of which, forty-nine (60%) self-identified as Black, twenty-six (32%) indicated they had a history of a breast cancer diagnosis, or had received BRCA genetic testing. Black participants who expressed concerns about genetic testing were fairly equally distributed between concerns that could be addressed with genetic counseling (24%) and concerns about the subsequent use of their genetic data (27%). The concerns expressed by the participants in our study underscore a need for transparent disclosures and assurances regarding the use and handling of genetic data. These findings should be viewed in context with patient-led efforts to overcome systemic inequities in cancer care, as Black cancer patients have joined forces with advocates and researchers to develop protective health data initiatives and to improve their representation in genomic datasets. Future research should prioritize the information needs and concerns of Black cancer patients. Interventions should be developed to support their hidden work as a means to reduce barriers and improve representation in precision medicine.

Germline variants in CDH1 are associated with elevated risks of diffuse gastric cancer and lobular breast cancer. It is uncertain whether there is an increased risk of colorectal neoplasia.This was a retrospective analysis of colonoscopy outcomes in patients with germline CDH1 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants.Eighty-five patients were included with a mean age of 46.9 years. Initial colonoscopy found adenomatous polyps in 30 patients (35.3%), including advanced adenomas in 9 (10.6%). No colorectal cancers were identified on index or subsequent colonoscopies (when available).CDH1 carriers have colorectal neoplasia identified at similar rates as in the general population. Despite potential difficulties after gastrectomy, colorectal cancer screening remains important in this population.

Genetic counselors (GCs) have traditionally been trained to adopt a position of equipoise or clinical neutrality. They provide information, answer questions, address barriers, and engage in shared decision-making, but generally, they do not prescribe a genetic test. Historically, GCs have generally been trained not to persuade the ambivalent or resistant patient. More recently, however, there has been discussion regarding when a greater degree of persuasion or directionality may be appropriate within genetic counseling (GC) and what role MI may play in this process. The role for “persuasive GC” is based on the premise that some genetic tests provide actionable information that would clearly benefit patients and families by impacting treatment or surveillance. For other tests, the benefits are less clear as they do not directly impact patient care or the benefits may be more subjective in nature, driven by patient values or psychological needs. For the former, we propose that GCs may adopt a more persuasive clinical approach while for the latter, a more traditional equipoise stance may be more appropriate. We suggest that motivational interviewing (MI) could serve as a unifying counseling model that allows GCs to handle both persuasive and equipoise encounters. For clearly beneficial tests, while directional, the MI encounter can still be non-directive, autonomy-supportive, and patient-centered. MI can also be adapted for equipoise situations, for example, placing less emphasis on eliciting and strengthening change talk as that is more a behavior change strategy than a shared decision-making strategy. The core principles and strategies of MI, such as autonomy support, evocation, open questions, reflective listening, and affirmation would apply to both persuasive and equipoise encounters. Key issues that merit discussion include how best to train GCs both during their initial and post-graduate education.

BACKGROUND: Mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency is the hallmark of tumours from Lynch syndrome (LS), sporadic MLH1 hypermethylated and Lynch-like syndrome (LLS), but there is a lack of understanding of the variability in their mutational profiles based on clinical phenotypes. The aim of this study was to perform a molecular characterisation to identify novel features that can impact tumour behaviour and clinical management. METHODS: We tested 105 MMR-deficient colorectal cancer tumours (25 LS, 35 LLS and 45 sporadic) for global exome microsatellite instability, cancer mutational signatures, mutational spectrum and neoepitope load. RESULTS: Fifty-three percent of tumours showed high contribution of MMR-deficient mutational signatures, high level of global exome microsatellite instability, loss of MLH1/PMS2 protein expression and included sporadic tumours. Thirty-one percent of tumours showed weaker features of MMR deficiency, 62% lost MSH2/MSH6 expression and included 60% of LS and 44% of LLS tumours. Remarkably, 9% of all tumours lacked global exome microsatellite instability. Lastly, HLA-B07:02 could be triggering the neoantigen presentation in tumours that show the strongest contribution of MMR-deficient tumours. CONCLUSIONS: Next-generation sequencing approaches allow for a granular molecular characterisation of MMR-deficient tumours, which can be essential to properly diagnose and treat patients with these tumours in the setting of personalised medicine.

The role of socioeconomic status and race on cancer survivorship has been identified, however, the role of neighborhood disadvantage and race in cancer survivorship has not been well studied. This analysis aimed to evaluate the relationship between a comprehensive measure of neighborhood-level social disadvantage and cancer survivorship in the racially diverse population of metropolitan Detroit. We calculated overall and cancer-specific survival for 11,367 Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) and 29,481 Non-Hispanic White (NHW) individuals with breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer using data from the Metropolitan Detroit Cancer Surveillance System. Neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage was measured by the Area Deprivation Index (ADI) at the census block group level using data from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey. Associations between ADI and survival were estimated using Cox proportional hazards mixed-effects models accounting for geographic grouping and adjusting for demographic, clinical, and treatment factors. Among all participants, an increase in ADI quartile was associated with increased overall mortality for all four cancer sites in multivariable models adjusting for race, age at diagnosis, stage, treatment, and Gleason score (prostate only). When stratifying by race, these associations remained among breast (NHW: Hazard Ratio (HR)=1.10, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.05-1.15, p Citation Format: Natalie G. Snider, Theresa Hastert, Mrudula Nair, Madhav KC, Julie Ruterbusch, Ann Schwartz, Ed Peters, Elena Stoffel, Laura Rozek, Kristen Purrington. Evaluating racial disparities in cancer survivorship via the role of area-level socioeconomic disadvantage in metropolitan Detroit [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 15th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2022 Sep 16-19; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2022;31(1 Suppl):Abstract nr A019.

Funder: Victorian Cancer Agency, Funder: NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Funder: Cancer Research UK, Funder: Cancer Council Tasmania, Funder: Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Funder: Cancer Australia, Funder: NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Funder: Fundación Científica de la Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer, Funder: Cancer Council South Australia, Funder: Swedish Cancer Society, Funder: NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Funder: Institut Català de la Salut, Funder: Cancer Council Victoria, Funder: Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, Funder: National Institutes of Health, BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome is a rare familial cancer syndrome caused by pathogenic variants in the mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2, that cause predisposition to various cancers, predominantly colorectal and endometrial cancer. Data are emerging that pathogenic variants in mismatch repair genes increase the risk of early-onset aggressive prostate cancer. The IMPACT study is prospectively assessing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in men with germline mismatch repair pathogenic variants. Here, we report the usefulness of PSA screening, prostate cancer incidence, and tumour characteristics after the first screening round in men with and without these germline pathogenic variants. METHODS: The IMPACT study is an international, prospective study. Men aged 40-69 years without a previous prostate cancer diagnosis and with a known germline pathogenic variant in the MLH1, MSH2, or MSH6 gene, and age-matched male controls who tested negative for a familial pathogenic variant in these genes were recruited from 34 genetic and urology clinics in eight countries, and underwent a baseline PSA screening. Men who had a PSA level higher than 3·0 ng/mL were offered a transrectal, ultrasound-guided, prostate biopsy and a histopathological analysis was done. All participants are undergoing a minimum of 5 years' annual screening. The primary endpoint was to determine the incidence, stage, and pathology of screening-detected prostate cancer in carriers of pathogenic variants compared with non-carrier controls. We used Fisher's exact test to compare the number of cases, cancer incidence, and positive predictive values of the PSA cutoff and biopsy between carriers and non-carriers and the differences between disease types (ie, cancer vs no cancer, clinically significant cancer vs no cancer). We assessed screening outcomes and tumour characteristics by pathogenic variant status. Here we present results from the first round of PSA screening in the IMPACT study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00261456, and is now closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2012, and March 1, 2020, 828 men were recruited (644 carriers of mismatch repair pathogenic variants [204 carriers of MLH1, 305 carriers of MSH2, and 135 carriers of MSH6] and 184 non-carrier controls [65 non-carriers of MLH1, 76 non-carriers of MSH2, and 43 non-carriers of MSH6]), and in order to boost the sample size for the non-carrier control groups, we randomly selected 134 non-carriers from the BRCA1 and BRCA2 cohort of the IMPACT study, who were included in all three non-carrier cohorts. Men were predominantly of European ancestry (899 [93%] of 953 with available data), with a mean age of 52·8 years (SD 8·3). Within the first screening round, 56 (6%) men had a PSA concentration of more than 3·0 ng/mL and 35 (4%) biopsies were done. The overall incidence of prostate cancer was 1·9% (18 of 962; 95% CI 1·1-2·9). The incidence among MSH2 carriers was 4·3% (13 of 305; 95% CI 2·3-7·2), MSH2 non-carrier controls was 0·5% (one of 210; 0·0-2·6), MSH6 carriers was 3·0% (four of 135; 0·8-7·4), and none were detected among the MLH1 carriers, MLH1 non-carrier controls, and MSH6 non-carrier controls. Prostate cancer incidence, using a PSA threshold of higher than 3·0 ng/mL, was higher in MSH2 carriers than in MSH2 non-carrier controls (4·3% vs 0·5%; p=0·011) and MSH6 carriers than MSH6 non-carrier controls (3·0% vs 0%; p=0·034). The overall positive predictive value of biopsy using a PSA threshold of 3·0 ng/mL was 51·4% (95% CI 34·0-68·6), and the overall positive predictive value of a PSA threshold of 3·0 ng/mL was 32·1% (20·3-46·0). INTERPRETATION: After the first screening round, carriers of MSH2 and MSH6 pathogenic variants had a higher incidence of prostate cancer compared with age-matched non-carrier controls. These findings support the use of targeted PSA screening in these men to identify those with clinically significant prostate cancer. Further annual screening rounds will need to confirm these findings. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, The Ronald and Rita McAulay Foundation, the National Institute for Health Research support to Biomedical Research Centres (The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust; Oxford; Manchester and the Cambridge Clinical Research Centre), Mr and Mrs Jack Baker, the Cancer Council of Tasmania, Cancer Australia, Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, Cancer Council of Victoria, Cancer Council of South Australia, the Victorian Cancer Agency, Cancer Australia, Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, Asociación Española Contra el Cáncer (AECC), the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER), the Institut Català de la Salut, Autonomous Government of Catalonia, Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute, Swedish Cancer Society, General Hospital in Malmö Foundation for Combating Cancer.

Much of the inherited susceptibility to pancreatic cancer remains unexplained. Germline variants that cause protein misfolding and impaired secretion of pancreatic enzymes such as CPA1 (encoding carboxypeptidase A1) can cause pancreatic acinar cell endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress. We investigated the hypothesis that pancreatic cancer could arise from germline variants in genes encoding pancreatic secretory enzymes that induce pancreatic acinar cell stress. We find ∼1% of 1,579 patients with pancreatic cancer vs. 1 of 2,012 controls have germline variants in the genes encoding CPA1 and CPB1 (carboxypeptidase B1) that impair secretion of its protein product and induce ER stress. These findings implicate pancreatic acinar cell stress as a mechanism of pancreatic cancer susceptibility.

Despite rapid technical progress and demonstrable effectiveness for some types of diagnosis and therapy, much remains to be learned about clinical genome and exome sequencing (CGES) and its role within the practice of medicine. The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) consortium includes 18 extramural research projects, one National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) intramural project, and a coordinating center funded by the NHGRI and National Cancer Institute. The consortium is exploring analytic and clinical validity and utility, as well as the ethical, legal, and social implications of sequencing via multidisciplinary approaches; it has thus far recruited 5,577 participants across a spectrum of symptomatic and healthy children and adults by utilizing both germline and cancer sequencing. The CSER consortium is analyzing data and creating publically available procedures and tools related to participant preferences and consent, variant classification, disclosure and management of primary and secondary findings, health outcomes, and integration with electronic health records. Future research directions will refine measures of clinical utility of CGES in both germline and somatic testing, evaluate the use of CGES for screening in healthy individuals, explore the penetrance of pathogenic variants through extensive phenotyping, reduce discordances in public databases of genes and variants, examine social and ethnic disparities in the provision of genomics services, explore regulatory issues, and estimate the value and downstream costs of sequencing. The CSER consortium has established a shared community of research sites by using diverse approaches to pursue the evidence-based development of best practices in genomic medicine.