Cargando…

Clinical utility of hereditary cancer panel testing: Impact of PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D results on patient management and adherence to provider recommendations

BACKGROUND: Although management guidelines exist for several genes associated with a 2‐fold to 5‐fold increase in the relative risk for certain cancers, the value of testing for them remains controversial. METHODS: De‐identified personal and family history data for 654 individuals with pathogenic va...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vysotskaia, Valentina, Kaseniit, K. Eerik, Bucheit, Leslie, Ready, Kaylene, Price, Kristin, Johansen Taber, Katherine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7003834/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31682005
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.32572
_version_ 1783494605548814336
author Vysotskaia, Valentina
Kaseniit, K. Eerik
Bucheit, Leslie
Ready, Kaylene
Price, Kristin
Johansen Taber, Katherine
author_facet Vysotskaia, Valentina
Kaseniit, K. Eerik
Bucheit, Leslie
Ready, Kaylene
Price, Kristin
Johansen Taber, Katherine
author_sort Vysotskaia, Valentina
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although management guidelines exist for several genes associated with a 2‐fold to 5‐fold increase in the relative risk for certain cancers, the value of testing for them remains controversial. METHODS: De‐identified personal and family history data for 654 individuals with pathogenic variants (PVs) in PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and/or RAD51D were analyzed for pretest and post‐test candidacy for guideline‐recommended management of cancer risk. These individuals were invited to complete a survey about provider recommendations and their adherence. RESULTS: Twenty‐four percent of CHEK2, ATM, PALB2, or NBN PV carriers were appropriate for consideration of annual breast magnetic resonance imaging screening before genetic testing, with the remaining 76% appropriate only after testing. No BRIP1, RAD51C, or RAD51D PV carriers were appropriate for consideration of risk‐reducing salpingo‐oophorectomy before genetic testing; 100% were appropriate only after testing. Seventeen percent of CHEK2 PV carriers were appropriate for earlier and more frequent colonoscopy before genetic testing, with the remaining 83% appropriate only after testing. Provider recommendations for annual breast magnetic resonance imaging, consideration of risk‐reducing salpingo‐oophorectomy, and earlier and more frequent colonoscopy were reported by 42%, 26%, and 66% of breast, ovarian, and colorectal cancer risk PV carriers, respectively, before genetic testing, versus 82%, 79%, and 81%, respectively, after testing. Nearly all respondents had planned or undertaken provider‐recommended management. CONCLUSIONS: Testing for PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D changed management for those carrying PVs. Provider recommendations were aligned with guidelines, and patients adhered to recommendations, both of which are critical for reducing both long‐term cancer morbidity and mortality.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7003834
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70038342020-02-10 Clinical utility of hereditary cancer panel testing: Impact of PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D results on patient management and adherence to provider recommendations Vysotskaia, Valentina Kaseniit, K. Eerik Bucheit, Leslie Ready, Kaylene Price, Kristin Johansen Taber, Katherine Cancer Original Articles BACKGROUND: Although management guidelines exist for several genes associated with a 2‐fold to 5‐fold increase in the relative risk for certain cancers, the value of testing for them remains controversial. METHODS: De‐identified personal and family history data for 654 individuals with pathogenic variants (PVs) in PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and/or RAD51D were analyzed for pretest and post‐test candidacy for guideline‐recommended management of cancer risk. These individuals were invited to complete a survey about provider recommendations and their adherence. RESULTS: Twenty‐four percent of CHEK2, ATM, PALB2, or NBN PV carriers were appropriate for consideration of annual breast magnetic resonance imaging screening before genetic testing, with the remaining 76% appropriate only after testing. No BRIP1, RAD51C, or RAD51D PV carriers were appropriate for consideration of risk‐reducing salpingo‐oophorectomy before genetic testing; 100% were appropriate only after testing. Seventeen percent of CHEK2 PV carriers were appropriate for earlier and more frequent colonoscopy before genetic testing, with the remaining 83% appropriate only after testing. Provider recommendations for annual breast magnetic resonance imaging, consideration of risk‐reducing salpingo‐oophorectomy, and earlier and more frequent colonoscopy were reported by 42%, 26%, and 66% of breast, ovarian, and colorectal cancer risk PV carriers, respectively, before genetic testing, versus 82%, 79%, and 81%, respectively, after testing. Nearly all respondents had planned or undertaken provider‐recommended management. CONCLUSIONS: Testing for PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D changed management for those carrying PVs. Provider recommendations were aligned with guidelines, and patients adhered to recommendations, both of which are critical for reducing both long‐term cancer morbidity and mortality. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-11-04 2020-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7003834/ /pubmed/31682005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.32572 Text en © 2019 Myriad Genetics, Inc. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Vysotskaia, Valentina
Kaseniit, K. Eerik
Bucheit, Leslie
Ready, Kaylene
Price, Kristin
Johansen Taber, Katherine
Clinical utility of hereditary cancer panel testing: Impact of PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D results on patient management and adherence to provider recommendations
title Clinical utility of hereditary cancer panel testing: Impact of PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D results on patient management and adherence to provider recommendations
title_full Clinical utility of hereditary cancer panel testing: Impact of PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D results on patient management and adherence to provider recommendations
title_fullStr Clinical utility of hereditary cancer panel testing: Impact of PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D results on patient management and adherence to provider recommendations
title_full_unstemmed Clinical utility of hereditary cancer panel testing: Impact of PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D results on patient management and adherence to provider recommendations
title_short Clinical utility of hereditary cancer panel testing: Impact of PALB2, ATM, CHEK2, NBN, BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D results on patient management and adherence to provider recommendations
title_sort clinical utility of hereditary cancer panel testing: impact of palb2, atm, chek2, nbn, brip1, rad51c, and rad51d results on patient management and adherence to provider recommendations
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7003834/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31682005
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.32572
work_keys_str_mv AT vysotskaiavalentina clinicalutilityofhereditarycancerpaneltestingimpactofpalb2atmchek2nbnbrip1rad51candrad51dresultsonpatientmanagementandadherencetoproviderrecommendations
AT kaseniitkeerik clinicalutilityofhereditarycancerpaneltestingimpactofpalb2atmchek2nbnbrip1rad51candrad51dresultsonpatientmanagementandadherencetoproviderrecommendations
AT bucheitleslie clinicalutilityofhereditarycancerpaneltestingimpactofpalb2atmchek2nbnbrip1rad51candrad51dresultsonpatientmanagementandadherencetoproviderrecommendations
AT readykaylene clinicalutilityofhereditarycancerpaneltestingimpactofpalb2atmchek2nbnbrip1rad51candrad51dresultsonpatientmanagementandadherencetoproviderrecommendations
AT pricekristin clinicalutilityofhereditarycancerpaneltestingimpactofpalb2atmchek2nbnbrip1rad51candrad51dresultsonpatientmanagementandadherencetoproviderrecommendations
AT johansentaberkatherine clinicalutilityofhereditarycancerpaneltestingimpactofpalb2atmchek2nbnbrip1rad51candrad51dresultsonpatientmanagementandadherencetoproviderrecommendations