OBJECTIVE: Knowledge of an inherited predisposition to myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and AML has important clinical implications for treatment decisions, surveillance, and care of at-risk relatives. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recently incorporated recommendations for germline genetic evaluation of patients with MDS/AML on the basis of personal and family history features, but the practicality of implementing these recommendations has not been studied.
METHODS: A hereditary hematology quality improvement (QI) committee was formed to implement these guidelines in a prospective cohort of patients diagnosed with MDS/AML. Referral for germline genetic testing was recommended for patients meeting NCCN guideline criteria. Referral patterns and genetic evaluation outcomes were compared with a historical cohort of patients with MDS/AML. Barriers to evaluation were identified.
RESULTS: Of the 90 patients with MDS/AML evaluated by the QI committee, 59 (66%) met criteria for germline evaluation. Implementation of the QI committee led to more referrals for germline evaluation in accordance with NCCN guidelines (31% v 14%, P = .03). However, the majority of those meeting criteria were never referred due to high medical acuity or being deceased or in hospice at the time of QI committee recommendations. Despite this, two (17%) of the 12 patients undergoing genetic testing were diagnosed with a hereditary myeloid malignancy syndrome.
CONCLUSIONS: Current NCCN guidelines resulted in two thirds of patients with MDS/AML meeting criteria for germline evaluation. A hereditary hematology-focused QI committee aided initial implementation and modestly improved NCCN guideline adherence. However, the high morbidity and mortality and prolonged inpatient stays associated with MDS/AML challenged traditional outpatient genetic counseling models. Further improvements in guideline adherence require innovating new models of genetic counseling and testing for this patient population.

Tumors of the central nervous system (CNS) comprise the second most common group of neoplasms in childhood. The incidence of germline predisposition among children with brain tumors continues to grow as our knowledge on disease etiology increases. Some children with brain tumors may present with nonmalignant phenotypic features of specific syndromes (e.g., nevoid basal cell carcinoma syndrome, neurofibromatosis type 1 and type 2, DICER1 syndrome, and constitutional mismatch-repair deficiency), while others may present with a strong family history of cancer (e.g., Li-Fraumeni syndrome) or with a rare tumor commonly found in the context of germline predisposition (e.g., rhabdoid tumor predisposition syndrome). Approximately 50% of patients with a brain tumor may be the first in a family identified to have a predisposition. The past decade has witnessed a rapid expansion in our molecular understanding of CNS tumors. A significant proportion of CNS tumors are now well characterized and known to harbor specific genetic changes that can be found in the germline. Additional novel predisposition syndromes are also being described. Identification of these germline syndromes in individual patients has not only enabled cascade testing of family members and early tumor surveillance but also increasingly affected cancer management in those patients. Therefore, the AACR Cancer Predisposition Working Group chose to highlight these advances in CNS tumor predisposition and summarize and/or generate surveillance recommendations for established and more recently emerging pediatric brain tumor predisposition syndromes.

Clinical use of gene panel testing for hematopoietic neoplasms in areas, such as diagnosis, prognosis prediction, and exploration of treatment options, has increased in recent years. The keys to interpreting gene variants detected in gene panel testing are to distinguish between germline and somatic variants and accurately determine whether the detected variants are pathogenic. If a variant is suspected to be a pathogenic germline variant, it is essential to confirm its consistency with the disease phenotype and gather a thorough family history. Donor eligibility must also be considered, especially if the patient\'s variant is also detected in the expected donor for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. However, determining the pathogenicity of gene variants is often complicated, given the current limited availability of databases covering germline variants of hematopoietic neoplasms. This means that hematologists will frequently need to interpret gene variants themselves. Here, we outline how to assess the pathogenicity of germline variants according to criteria from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association for Molecular Pathology standards and guidelines for the interpretation of variants using DDX41, a gene recently shown to be closely associated with myeloid neoplasms with a germline predisposition, as an example.

In the 33 years since the first diagnostic cancer predisposition gene (CPG) tests in the Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, there has been substantial changes in the identification of index cases and cascade testing for at-risk family members. National guidelines in England and Wales are usually determined from the National Institute of healthcare Evidence and these have impacted on the thresholds for testing BRCA1/2 in Hereditary Breast Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) and in determining that all cases of colorectal and endometrial cancer should undergo screening for Lynch syndrome. Gaps for testing other CPGs relevant to HBOC have been filled by the UK Cancer Genetics Group and CanGene-CanVar project (web ref. https://www.cangene-canvaruk.org/ ). We present time trends (1990-2020) of identification of index cases with germline CPG variants and numbers of subsequent cascade tests, for BRCA1, BRCA2, and the Lynch genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2). For BRCA1/2 there was a definite increase in the proportion of index cases with ovarian cancer only and pre-symptomatic index tests both doubling from 16 to 32% and 3.2 to > 8% respectively. A mean of 1.73-1.74 additional family tests were generated for each BRCA1/2 index case within 2 years. Overall close to one positive cascade test was generated per index case resulting in > 1000 risk reducing surgery operations. In Lynch syndrome slightly more cascade tests were performed in the first two years potentially reflecting the increased actionability in males with 42.2% of pre-symptomatic tests in males compared to 25.8% in BRCA1/2 (p < 0.0001).

OBJECTIVE: To develop recommendations for germline mutation testing for patients with breast cancer.
METHODS: An ASCO-Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) panel convened to develop recommendations based on a systematic review and formal consensus process.
RESULTS: Forty-seven articles met eligibility criteria for the germline mutation testing recommendations; 18 for the genetic counseling recommendations.
CONCLUSIONS: BRCA1/2 mutation testing should be offered to all newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer ≤65 years and select patients >65 years based on personal history, family history, ancestry, or eligibility for poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor therapy. All patients with recurrent breast cancer who are candidates for PARP inhibitor therapy should be offered BRCA1/2 testing, regardless of family history. BRCA1/2 testing should be offered to women who develop a second primary cancer in the ipsilateral or contralateral breast. For patients with prior history of breast cancer and without active disease, testing should be offered to patients diagnosed ≤65 years and selectively in patients diagnosed after 65 years, if it will inform personal and family risk. Testing for high-penetrance cancer susceptibility genes beyond BRCA1/2 should be offered to those with supportive family histories; testing for moderate-penetrance genes may be offered if necessary to inform personal and family cancer risk. Patients should be provided enough pretest information for informed consent; those with pathogenic variants should receive individualized post-test counseling. Variants of uncertain significance should not impact management, and patients with such variants should be followed for reclassification. Referral to providers experienced in clinical cancer genetics may help facilitate patient selection and interpretation of expanded testing, and provide counseling of individuals without pathogenic germline variants but with significant family history.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary cancer syndromes are an important subset of malignant cancers caused by pathogenic variants in one of many known cancer predisposition genes. Diagnosis of cancer predisposition is based on genetic testing using next-generation sequencing. This allows many genes to be analysed at once, increasing the number of variants identified. The correct classification of the variants found is essential for the clinical interpretation of genetic test results.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to summarise the rules for classifying identified variants within individual laboratories and to present the process for creating a common classification. In the Czech Republic, the sharing of identified genetic variants and the development of their consensus classification among national laboratory diagnostic communities is carried out within the Czech Cancer Panel for Clinical Application (CZECANCA) consortium of scientific and diagnostic oncogenetic laboratories. Consensus for variant classification follows a defined protocol. Sharing the results and consensus classification accelerates and refines the release of genetic test results, harmonises results between laboratories and thus contributes to improving the care of individuals at high risk of cancer and their relatives.

Adult and paediatric patients with pathogenic variants in the gene encoding succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) subunit B (SDHB) often have locally aggressive, recurrent or metastatic phaeochromocytomas and paragangliomas (PPGLs). Furthermore, SDHB PPGLs have the highest rates of disease-specific morbidity and mortality compared with other hereditary PPGLs. PPGLs with SDHB pathogenic variants are often less differentiated and do not produce substantial amounts of catecholamines (in some patients, they produce only dopamine) compared with other hereditary subtypes, which enables these tumours to grow subclinically for a long time. In addition, SDHB pathogenic variants support tumour growth through high levels of the oncometabolite succinate and other mechanisms related to cancer initiation and progression. As a result, pseudohypoxia and upregulation of genes related to the hypoxia signalling pathway occur, promoting the growth, migration, invasiveness and metastasis of cancer cells. These factors, along with a high rate of metastasis, support early surgical intervention and total resection of PPGLs, regardless of the tumour size. The treatment of metastases is challenging and relies on either local or systemic therapies, or sometimes both. This Consensus statement should help guide clinicians in the diagnosis and management of patients with SDHB PPGLs.

The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic focus primarily on assessment of pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants associated with increased risk of breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer, including BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, PALB2, PTEN, and TP53, and recommended approaches to genetic counseling/testing and care strategies in individuals with these P/LP variants. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize important updates regarding: (1) a new section for transgender, nonbinary and gender diverse people who have a hereditary predisposition to cancer focused on risk reduction strategies for ovarian cancer, uterine cancer, prostate cancer, and breast cancer; and (2) testing criteria and management associated with TP53 P/LP variants and Li-Fraumeni syndrome.

Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is the third most common malignancy associated with Lynch syndrome (LS). The current European urology guidelines recommend screening for LS in patients with UTUC up to the age of 60 years. In this study, we examined a cohort of patients with UTUC for potential association with LS in order to establish the sensitivity of current guidelines in detecting LS. A total of 180 patients with confirmed diagnosis of UTUC were enrolled in the study during a 12-year period (2010-2022). Loss of DNA-mismatch repair proteins (MMRp) expression was identified in 15/180 patients (8.3%). Germline analysis was eventually performed in 8 patients confirming LS in 5 patients (2.8%), including 4 germline mutations in MSH6 and 1 germline mutation in MSH2. LS-related UTUC included 3 females and 2 males, with a mean age of 66.2 years (median 71 years, range 46-75 years). Four of five LS patients (all with MSH6 mutation) were older than 65 years (mean age 71.3, median 72 years). Our findings indicate that LS-associated UTUCs can occur in patients with LS older than 60 years. In contrast to previous studies which used mainly highly pre-selected populations with already diagnosed LS, the most frequent mutation in our cohort involved MSH6 gene. All MSH6 mutation carriers were > 65 years, and UTUC was the first LS manifestation in 2/4 patients. Using current screening guidelines, a significant proportion of patients with LS-associated UTUC may be missed. We suggest universal immunohistochemical MMRp screening for all UTUCs, regardless of age and clinical history.

BRCA1-associated protein-1 (BAP1) is a recognised tumour suppressor gene. Germline BAP1 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants are associated with predisposition to multiple tumours, including uveal melanoma, malignant pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma, renal cell carcinoma and specific non-malignant neoplasms of the skin, as part of the autosomal dominant BAP1-tumour predisposition syndrome. The overall lifetime risk for BAP1 carriers to develop at least one BAP1-associated tumour is up to 85%, although due to ascertainment bias, current estimates of risk are likely to be overestimated. As for many rare cancer predisposition syndromes, there is limited scientific evidence to support the utility of surveillance and, therefore, management recommendations for BAP1 carriers are based on expert opinion. To date, European recommendations for BAP1 carriers have not been published but are necessary due to the emerging phenotype of this recently described syndrome and increased identification of BAP1 carriers via large gene panels or tumour sequencing. To address this, the Clinical Guideline Working Group of the CanGene-CanVar project in the United Kingdom invited European collaborators to collaborate to develop guidelines to harmonize surveillance programmes within Europe. Recommendations with respect to BAP1 testing and surveillance were achieved following literature review and Delphi survey completed by a core group and an extended expert group of 34 European specialists including Geneticists, Ophthalmologists, Oncologists, Dermatologists and Pathologists. It is recognised that these largely evidence-based but pragmatic recommendations will evolve over time as further data from research collaborations informs the phenotypic spectrum and surveillance outcomes.