Literature DB >> 29360614

Impact of Multigene Panel Testing on Surgical Decision Making in Breast Cancer Patients.

Holly J Pederson1, Dharmesh Gopalakrishnan2, Ryan Noss3, Courtney Yanda4, Charis Eng3, Stephen R Grobmyer5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: With the advent of multigene panel testing for breast cancer patients, germline mutations with unknown association with cancer risk, known as variants of uncertain significance (VUS), are being increasingly identified. Some studies have shown higher rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomies (CPM) in these patients, despite lack of evidence to support this intervention. We analyzed surgical choices in patients who were identified to have VUS. STUDY
DESIGN: A retrospective review was performed of patients with triple-negative breast cancer treated at a single institution after multigene panel tests became available (September 1, 2013 to February 28, 2017). Rates of genetic testing, results of testing, and surgical decision making were evaluated. Chi-square or Fisher's exact test was used to compare categorical variables. A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: There were 477 triple-negative breast cancer patients identified; 331 met established criteria for genetic testing and 226 (68.3%) underwent genetic testing (multigene panel, n = 130 and BRCA1/2 testing, n = 96). All of them received risk-appropriate genetic counseling and follow-up. Of these, 29 (12.8%) patients had pathogenic mutations in BRCA1/2 or PALB2 (Mut+), 42 (18.6%) had VUS (VUS+), and 155 (68.6%) had no mutations identified (Mut-). Variants of uncertain significance in 6 of 42 patients (14.3%) were later reclassified as normal variants. Eighty-eight percent of Mut+ patients underwent CPM compared with 20.1% of Mut- and 21.4% of VUS+ patients (p < 0.001 for both). Rates of CPM were not significantly different between VUS+ and Mut- (p = 0.37). Multigene panel testing detected pathogenic mutations in non-breast cancer-associated genes in 6 patients, with significant management implications.
CONCLUSIONS: When combined with risk-appropriate genetic counseling, detection of VUS did not lead to excessive CPM in this cohort of triple-negative breast cancer patients. Furthermore, panel testing detected mutations in non-breast cancer-associated genes, which had significant implications on management and outcomes.
Copyright © 2018 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29360614     DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.12.037

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Surg        ISSN: 1072-7515            Impact factor:   6.113


  9 in total

1.  Contralateral Risk-Reducing Mastectomy in Breast Cancer Patients Who Undergo Multigene Panel Testing.

Authors:  Brittany L Murphy; Min Yi; Banu K Arun; Angelica M Gutierrez Barrera; Isabelle Bedrosian
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-07-27       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Timely cancer genetic counseling and testing for young women with breast cancer: impact on surgical decision-making for contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy.

Authors:  Shenin A Dettwyler; Darcy L Thull; Priscilla F McAuliffe; Jennifer G Steiman; Ronald R Johnson; Emilia J Diego; Phuong L Mai
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2022-05-21       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  Predictors of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in genetically high risk newly diagnosed breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Mara Tynan; Beth N Peshkin; Claudine Isaacs; Shawna Willey; Heiddis B Valdimarsdottir; Rachel Nusbaum; Gillian Hooker; Suzanne C O'Neill; Lina Jandorf; Scott P Kelly; Jessica Heinzmann; Sarah Kelleher; Elizabeth Poggi; Marc D Schwartz
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 4.872

4.  Clinical management among individuals with variant of uncertain significance in hereditary cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sukh Makhnoon; Erica M Bednar; Kate J Krause; Susan K Peterson; Maria A Lopez-Olivo
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 4.438

5.  Canadian genetic healthcare professionals' attitudes towards discussing private pay options with patients.

Authors:  Vanessa Di Gioacchino; Sylvie Langlois; Alison M Elliott
Journal:  Mol Genet Genomic Med       Date:  2019-02-02       Impact factor: 2.183

6.  Evolving indications and long-term oncological outcomes of risk-reducing bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy.

Authors:  S R Grobmyer; H J Pederson; S A Valente; Z Al-Hilli; D Radford; R Djohan; R Yetman; C Eng; J P Crowe
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2018-11-26

Review 7.  Psychological and health behaviour outcomes following multi-gene panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk: a mini-review of the literature.

Authors:  Lindsay Carlsson; Emily Thain; Brittany Gillies; Kelly Metcalfe
Journal:  Hered Cancer Clin Pract       Date:  2022-06-22       Impact factor: 2.164

8.  Clinical and psychological outcomes of receiving a variant of uncertain significance from multigene panel testing or genomic sequencing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chloe Mighton; Salma Shickh; Elizabeth Uleryk; Petros Pechlivanoglou; Yvonne Bombard
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2020-09-14       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 9.  Multi-Gene Testing Overview with a Clinical Perspective in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Martina Dameri; Lorenzo Ferrando; Gabriella Cirmena; Claudio Vernieri; Giancarlo Pruneri; Alberto Ballestrero; Gabriele Zoppoli
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 5.923

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.