Literature DB >> 28749474

Racial/ethnic differences in multiple-gene sequencing results for hereditary cancer risk.

Jennifer L Caswell-Jin1, Tanya Gupta1, Evan Hall1, Iva M Petrovchich1, Meredith A Mills1, Kerry E Kingham1, Rachel Koff1, Nicolette M Chun1, Peter Levonian1, Alexandra P Lebensohn1, James M Ford1, Allison W Kurian1.   

Abstract

PurposeWe examined racial/ethnic differences in the usage and results of germ-line multiple-gene sequencing (MGS) panels to evaluate hereditary cancer risk.MethodsWe collected genetic testing results and clinical information from 1,483 patients who underwent MGS at Stanford University between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2015.ResultsAsians and Hispanics presented for MGS at younger ages than whites (48 and 47 vs. 55; P = 5E-16 and 5E-14). Across all panels, the rate of pathogenic variants (15%) did not differ significantly between racial groups. Rates by gene did differ: in particular, a higher percentage of whites than nonwhites carried pathogenic CHEK2 variants (3.8% vs. 1.0%; P = 0.002). The rate of a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) result was higher in nonwhites than whites (36% vs. 27%; P = 2E-4). The probability of a VUS increased with increasing number of genes tested; this effect was more pronounced for nonwhites than for whites (1.1% absolute difference in VUS rates testing BRCA1/2 vs. 8% testing 13 genes vs. 14% testing 28 genes), worsening the disparity.ConclusionIn this diverse cohort undergoing MGS testing, pathogenic variant rates were similar between racial/ethnic groups. By contrast, VUS results were more frequent among nonwhites, with potential significance for the impact of MGS testing by race/ethnicity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28749474     DOI: 10.1038/gim.2017.96

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  21 in total

1.  A comprehensive laboratory-based program for classification of variants of uncertain significance in hereditary cancer genes.

Authors:  J M Eggington; K R Bowles; K Moyes; S Manley; L Esterling; S Sizemore; E Rosenthal; A Theisen; J Saam; C Arnell; D Pruss; J Bennett; L A Burbidge; B Roa; R J Wenstrup
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 4.438

2.  Inherited Mutations in Women With Ovarian Carcinoma.

Authors:  Barbara M Norquist; Maria I Harrell; Mark F Brady; Tom Walsh; Ming K Lee; Suleyman Gulsuner; Sarah S Bernards; Silvia Casadei; Qian Yi; Robert A Burger; John K Chan; Susan A Davidson; Robert S Mannel; Paul A DiSilvestro; Heather A Lankes; Nilsa C Ramirez; Mary Claire King; Elizabeth M Swisher; Michael J Birrer
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 31.777

3.  Frequency of mutations in individuals with breast cancer referred for BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing using next-generation sequencing with a 25-gene panel.

Authors:  Nadine Tung; Chiara Battelli; Brian Allen; Rajesh Kaldate; Satish Bhatnagar; Karla Bowles; Kirsten Timms; Judy E Garber; Christina Herold; Leif Ellisen; Jill Krejdovsky; Kim DeLeonardis; Kristin Sedgwick; Kathleen Soltis; Benjamin Roa; Richard J Wenstrup; Anne-Renee Hartman
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-09-03       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Panel Testing for Familial Breast Cancer: Calibrating the Tension Between Research and Clinical Care.

Authors:  Ella R Thompson; Simone M Rowley; Na Li; Simone McInerny; Lisa Devereux; Michelle W Wong-Brown; Alison H Trainer; Gillian Mitchell; Rodney J Scott; Paul A James; Ian G Campbell
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-01-19       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Genetic Misdiagnoses and the Potential for Health Disparities.

Authors:  Arjun K Manrai; Birgit H Funke; Heidi L Rehm; Morten S Olesen; Bradley A Maron; Peter Szolovits; David M Margulies; Joseph Loscalzo; Isaac S Kohane
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2016-08-18       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian, Version 2.2015.

Authors:  Mary B Daly; Robert Pilarski; Jennifer E Axilbund; Michael Berry; Saundra S Buys; Beth Crawford; Meagan Farmer; Susan Friedman; Judy E Garber; Seema Khan; Catherine Klein; Wendy Kohlmann; Allison Kurian; Jennifer K Litton; Lisa Madlensky; P Kelly Marcom; Sofia D Merajver; Kenneth Offit; Tuya Pal; Huma Rana; Gwen Reiser; Mark E Robson; Kristen Mahoney Shannon; Elizabeth Swisher; Nicoleta C Voian; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Alison Whelan; Myra J Wick; Georgia L Wiesner; Mary Dwyer; Rashmi Kumar; Susan Darlow
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 11.908

7.  Frequency of Germline Mutations in 25 Cancer Susceptibility Genes in a Sequential Series of Patients With Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Nadine Tung; Nancy U Lin; John Kidd; Brian A Allen; Nanda Singh; Richard J Wenstrup; Anne-Renee Hartman; Eric P Winer; Judy E Garber
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-03-14       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Gaps in Incorporating Germline Genetic Testing Into Treatment Decision-Making for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Allison W Kurian; Yun Li; Ann S Hamilton; Kevin C Ward; Sarah T Hawley; Monica Morrow; M Chandler McLeod; Reshma Jagsi; Steven J Katz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 50.717

9.  Utilization of multigene panels in hereditary cancer predisposition testing: analysis of more than 2,000 patients.

Authors:  Holly LaDuca; A J Stuenkel; Jill S Dolinsky; Steven Keiles; Stephany Tandy; Tina Pesaran; Elaine Chen; Chia-Ling Gau; Erika Palmaer; Kamelia Shoaepour; Divya Shah; Virginia Speare; Stephanie Gandomi; Elizabeth Chao
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2014-04-24       Impact factor: 8.822

10.  Pathogenic and likely pathogenic variant prevalence among the first 10,000 patients referred for next-generation cancer panel testing.

Authors:  Lisa R Susswein; Megan L Marshall; Rachel Nusbaum; Kristen J Vogel Postula; Scott M Weissman; Lauren Yackowski; Erica M Vaccari; Jeffrey Bissonnette; Jessica K Booker; M Laura Cremona; Federica Gibellini; Patricia D Murphy; Daniel E Pineda-Alvarez; Guido D Pollevick; Zhixiong Xu; Gabi Richard; Sherri Bale; Rachel T Klein; Kathleen S Hruska; Wendy K Chung
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  45 in total

1.  Genetic Testing and Results in a Population-Based Cohort of Breast Cancer Patients and Ovarian Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Allison W Kurian; Kevin C Ward; Nadia Howlader; Dennis Deapen; Ann S Hamilton; Angela Mariotto; Daniel Miller; Lynne S Penberthy; Steven J Katz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-04-09       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Perspective: The Clinical Use of Polygenic Risk Scores: Race, Ethnicity, and Health Disparities.

Authors:  Megan C Roberts; Muin J Khoury; George A Mensah
Journal:  Ethn Dis       Date:  2019-07-18       Impact factor: 1.847

3.  Diversity in the Era of Precision Medicine - From Bench to Bedside Implementation.

Authors:  Abdullah Mamun; Nana Y Nsiah; Meenakshi Srinivasan; Ayyappa Chaturvedula; Riyaz Basha; Deanna Cross; Harlan P Jones; Karabi Nandy; Jamboor K Vishwanatha
Journal:  Ethn Dis       Date:  2019-07-18       Impact factor: 1.847

4.  Factors associated with willingness to provide biospecimens for genetics research among African American cancer survivors.

Authors:  Altovise T Ewing; Nnenna Kalu; Gloria Cain; Lori H Erby; Luisel J Ricks-Santi; Eva Tetteyfio-Kidd Telemaque; Denise M Scott
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2019-03-14

Review 5.  Importance of Genetic Studies of Cardiometabolic Disease in Diverse Populations.

Authors:  Lindsay Fernández-Rhodes; Kristin L Young; Adam G Lilly; Laura M Raffield; Heather M Highland; Genevieve L Wojcik; Cary Agler; Shelly-Ann M Love; Samson Okello; Lauren E Petty; Mariaelisa Graff; Jennifer E Below; Kimon Divaris; Kari E North
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  2020-06-04       Impact factor: 17.367

6.  Update on multi-gene panel testing and communication of genetic test results.

Authors:  Sonya Reid; Tuya Pal
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 2.431

7.  Inequities in multi-gene hereditary cancer testing: lower diagnostic yield and higher VUS rate in individuals who identify as Hispanic, African or Asian and Pacific Islander as compared to European.

Authors:  Mesaki K Ndugga-Kabuye; Rachel B Issaka
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 2.375

Review 8.  The Future of Genomic Studies Must Be Globally Representative: Perspectives from PAGE.

Authors:  Stephanie A Bien; Genevieve L Wojcik; Chani J Hodonsky; Christopher R Gignoux; Iona Cheng; Tara C Matise; Ulrike Peters; Eimear E Kenny; Kari E North
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2019-04-12       Impact factor: 8.929

9.  Population Histories of the United States Revealed through Fine-Scale Migration and Haplotype Analysis.

Authors:  Chengzhen L Dai; Mohammad M Vazifeh; Chen-Hsiang Yeang; Remi Tachet; R Spencer Wells; Miguel G Vilar; Mark J Daly; Carlo Ratti; Alicia R Martin
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2020-03-05       Impact factor: 11.025

10.  The clinical imperative for inclusivity: Race, ethnicity, and ancestry (REA) in genomics.

Authors:  Alice B Popejoy; Deborah I Ritter; Kristy Crooks; Erin Currey; Stephanie M Fullerton; Lucia A Hindorff; Barbara Koenig; Erin M Ramos; Elena P Sorokin; Hannah Wand; Mathew W Wright; James Zou; Christopher R Gignoux; Vence L Bonham; Sharon E Plon; Carlos D Bustamante
Journal:  Hum Mutat       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 4.878

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.