The impact of hereditary cancer gene panels on clinical care and lessons learned
- PMID: 29162654
- PMCID: PMC5701305
- DOI: 10.1101/mcs.a002154
The impact of hereditary cancer gene panels on clinical care and lessons learned
Abstract
Mutations in hereditary cancer syndromes account for a modest fraction of all cancers; however, identifying patients with these germline mutations offers tremendous health benefits to both patients and their family members. There are about 60 genes that confer a high lifetime risk of specific cancers, and this information can be used to tailor prevention, surveillance, and treatment. With advances in next-generation sequencing technologies and the elimination of gene patents for evaluating genetic information, we are now able to analyze multiple genes simultaneously, leading to the widespread clinical use of gene panels for germline cancer testing. Over the last 4 years since these panels were introduced, we have learned about the diagnostic yield of testing, the expanded phenotypes of the patients with mutations, and the clinical utility of genetic testing in patients with cancer and/or without cancer but with a family history of cancer. We have also experienced challenges including the large number of variants of unknown significance (VUSs), identification of somatic mutations and need to differentiate these from germline mutations, technical issues with particular genes and mutations, insurance coverage and reimbursement issues, lack of access to data, and lack of clinical management guidelines for newer and, especially, moderate and low-penetrance genes. The lessons learned from cancer genetic testing panels are applicable to other clinical areas as well and highlight the problems to be solved as we advance genomic medicine.
© 2017 Okur and Chung; Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
Figures
References
-
- Berry DA, Iversen ES Jr, Gudbjartsson DF, Hiller EH, Garber JE, Peshkin BN, Lerman C, Watson P, Lynch HT, Hilsenbeck SG, et al. 2002. BRCAPRO validation, sensitivity of genetic testing of BRCA1/BRCA2, and prevalence of other breast cancer susceptibility genes. J Clin Oncol 20: 2701–2712. - PubMed
-
- Borzekowski DL, Guan Y, Smith KC, Erby LH, Roter DL. 2014. The Angelina effect: immediate reach, grasp, and impact of going public. Genet Med 16: 516–521. - PubMed
-
- Bradbury AR, Patrick-Miller L, Long J, Powers J, Stopfer J, Forman A, Rybak C, Mattie K, Brandt A, Chambers R, et al. 2015. Development of a tiered and binned genetic counseling model for informed consent in the era of multiplex testing for cancer susceptibility. Genet Med 17: 485–492. - PMC - PubMed
-
- Drohan B, Roche CA, Cusack JC Jr, Hughes KS. 2012. Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and other hereditary syndromes: using technology to identify carriers. Ann Surg Oncol 19: 1732–1737. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical