The Guidelines for Clinical Practice for carriers of pathogenic variants in clinically relevant cancer predisposition genes define the steps of primary and secondary prevention that should be provided to these individuals at high risk of developing hereditary cancer in the Czech Republic. The drafting of the guidelines was organized by the Oncogenetics Working Group of the Society for Medical Genetics and Genomics of J. E. Purkyně Czech Medical Society (SLG ČLS JEP) in cooperation with the representatives of oncology and oncogynecology. The guidelines are based on the current recommendations of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) and take into account the capacity of the Czech healthcare system.

OBJECTIVE: The autosomal dominant cancer predisposition disorders hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) and Lynch syndrome (LS) are genetic conditions for which early identification and intervention have a positive effect on the individual and public health. The goals of this study were to determine whether germline genetic screening using exome sequencing could be used to efficiently identify carriers of HBOC and LS.
METHODS: Participants were recruited from three geographically and racially diverse sites in the United States (Rochester, MN; Phoenix, AZ; Jacksonville, FL). Participants underwent Exome+ sequencing (Helix Inc, San Mateo, CA) and return of results for specific genetic findings: HBOC (BRCA1 and BRCA1) and LS (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2, and EPCAM). Chart review was performed to collect demographics and personal and family cancer history.
RESULTS: To date, 44,306 participants have enrolled in Tapestry. Annotation and interpretation of all variants in genes for HBOC and LS resulted in the identification of 550 carriers (prevalence, 1.24%), which included 387 with HBOC (27.2% BRCA1, 42.8% BRCA2) and 163 with LS (12.3% MSH6, 8.8% PMS2, 4.5% MLH1, 3.8% MSH2, and 0.2% EPCAM). More than half of these participants (52.1%) were newly diagnosed carriers with HBOC and LS. In all, 39.2% of HBOC/LS carriers did not satisfy National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for genetic evaluation. NCCN criteria were less commonly met in underrepresented minority populations versus self-reported White race (51.5% v 37.5%, P = .028).
CONCLUSIONS: Our results emphasize the need for wider utilization of germline genetic sequencing for enhanced screening and detection of individuals who have LS and HBOC cancer predisposition syndromes.

暂无摘要。

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a poor prognosis, with a 5-year overall survival rate of 10%. In November 2018, NCCN recommended that all patients with PDAC receive genetic counseling (GC) and germline testing regardless of family history. We hypothesized that patients with PDAC were more likely to be referred for testing after this change to the guidelines, regardless of presumed predictive factors, and that compliance would be further improved following the implementation of a hereditary cancer clinic (HCC).
We conducted a single-institution retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with PDAC from June 2017 through December 2021 at University of California, Irvine. We compared rates of genetics referral among patients in different diagnostic eras: the 18-month period before the NCCN Guideline change (pre-NCCN era: June 2017 through November 2018), 14 months following the change (post-NCCN era: December 2018 through January 2020), and 18 months after the creation of an HCC (HCC era: June 2020 through December 2021). Family and personal cancer history, genetics referral patterns, and results of GC were recorded. Data were compared using chi-square, Fisher exact, and multivariate analyses.
A total of 335 patients were treated for PDAC (123 pre-NCCN, 109 post-NCCN, and 103 HCC) at University of California, Irvine. Demographics across groups were comparable. Prior to the guideline changes, 30% were referred to GC compared with 54.7% in the post-NCCN era. After the implementation of the HCC, 77.4% were referred to GC (P<.0001). The odds ratio (OR) for referral to GC among patients with a positive family history of cancer progressively decreased following the change (pre-NCCN era: OR, 11.90 [95% CI, 3.00-80.14]; post-NCCN era: OR, 3.39 [95% CI, 1.13-10.76]; HCC era: OR, 3.11 [95% CI, 0.95-10.16]).
The 2018 updates to the NCCN Guidelines for PDAC recommending germline testing for all patients with PDAC significantly increased GC referral rates at our academic medical center. Implementation of an HCC further boosted compliance with guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a genetic disorder of lipoprotein metabolism that causes an increased risk of premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Although early diagnosis and treatment of FH can significantly improve the cardiovascular prognosis, this disorder is underdiagnosed and undertreated. For these reasons the Italian Society for the Study of Atherosclerosis (SISA) assembled a Consensus Panel with the task to provide guidelines for FH diagnosis and treatment.
RESULTS: Our guidelines include: i) an overview of the genetic complexity of FH and the role of candidate genes involved in LDL metabolism; ii) the prevalence of FH in the population; iii) the clinical criteria adopted for the diagnosis of FH; iv) the screening for ASCVD and the role of cardiovascular imaging techniques; v) the role of molecular diagnosis in establishing the genetic bases of the disorder; vi) the current therapeutic options in both heterozygous and homozygous FH. Treatment strategies and targets are currently based on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, as the prognosis of FH largely depends on the magnitude of LDL-C reduction achieved by lipid-lowering therapies. Statins with or without ezetimibe are the mainstay of treatment. Addition of novel medications like PCSK9 inhibitors, ANGPTL3 inhibitors or lomitapide in homozygous FH results in a further reduction of LDL-C levels. LDL apheresis is indicated in FH patients with inadequate response to cholesterol-lowering therapies.
CONCLUSIONS: FH is a common, treatable genetic disorder and, although our understanding of this disease has improved, many challenges still remain with regard to its identification and management.

Data harmonization involves combining data from multiple independent sources and processing the data to produce one uniform dataset. Merging separate genotypes or whole-genome sequencing datasets has been proposed as a strategy to increase the statistical power of association tests by increasing the effective sample size. However, data harmonization is not a widely adopted strategy due to the difficulties with merging data (including confounding produced by batch effects and population stratification). Detailed data harmonization protocols are scarce and are often conflicting. Moreover, data harmonization protocols that accommodate samples of admixed ancestry are practically non-existent. Existing data harmonization procedures must be modified to ensure the heterogeneous ancestry of admixed individuals is incorporated into additional downstream analyses without confounding results. Here, we propose a set of guidelines for merging multi-platform genetic data from admixed samples that can be adopted by any investigator with elementary bioinformatics experience. We have applied these guidelines to aggregate 1544 tuberculosis (TB) case-control samples from six separate in-house datasets and conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of TB susceptibility. The GWAS performed on the merged dataset had improved power over analyzing the datasets individually and produced summary statistics free from bias introduced by batch effects and population stratification. © 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC. Basic Protocol 1: Processing separate datasets comprising array genotype data Alternate Protocol 1: Processing separate datasets comprising array genotype and whole-genome sequencing data Alternate Protocol 2: Performing imputation using a local reference panel Basic Protocol 2: Merging separate datasets Basic Protocol 3: Ancestry inference using ADMIXTURE and RFMix Basic Protocol 4: Batch effect correction using pseudo-case-control comparisons.

In the last decade, an incredible improvement has been made in elucidating the genetic bases of cardiomyopathies. Here we report the impact of either the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines or the use of whole exome sequencing (WES) in terms of a number of variants of uncertain significance (VUS) and missed diagnoses in a series of 260 patients affected by inherited cardiac disorders. Samples were analyzed using a targeted gene panel of 128 cardiac-related genes and/or WES in a subset of patients, with a three-tier approach. Analyzing (i) only a subset of genes related to the clinical presentation, strictly following the ESC guidelines, 20.77% positive test were assessed. The incremental diagnostic rate for (ii) the whole gene panel, and (iii) the WES was 4.71% and 11.67%, respectively. The diverse analytical approaches increased the number of VUSs and incidental findings. Indeed, the use of WES highlights that there is a small percentage of syndromic conditions that standard analysis would not have detected. Moreover, the use of targeted sequencing coupled with \"narrow\" analytical approach prevents the detection of variants in actionable genes that could allow for preventive treatment. Our data suggest that genetic testing might aid clinicians in the diagnosis of inheritable cardiac disorders.

BACKGROUND: The CanRisk tool, which operationalises the Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) is used by Clinical Geneticists, Genetic Counsellors, Breast Oncologists, Surgeons and Family History Nurses for breast cancer risk assessments both nationally and internationally. There are currently no guidelines with respect to the day-to-day clinical application of CanRisk and differing inputs to the model can result in different recommendations for practice.
METHODS: To address this gap, the UK Cancer Genetics Group in collaboration with the Association of Breast Surgery and the CanGene-CanVar programme held a workshop on 16th of May 2023, with the aim of establishing best practice guidelines.
RESULTS: Using a pre-workshop survey followed by structured discussion and in-meeting polling, we achieved consensus for UK best practice in use of CanRisk in making recommendations for breast cancer surveillance, eligibility for genetic testing and the input of available information to undertake an individualised risk assessment.
CONCLUSIONS: Whilst consensus recommendations were achieved, the meeting highlighted some of the barriers limiting the use of CanRisk in clinical practice and identified areas that require further work and collaboration with relevant national bodies and policy makers to incorporate wider use of CanRisk into routine breast cancer risk assessments.

OBJECTIVE: To guide use of multigene panels for germline genetic testing for patients with cancer.
METHODS: An ASCO Expert Panel convened to develop recommendations on the basis of a systematic review of guidelines, consensus statements, and studies of germline and somatic genetic testing.
RESULTS: Fifty-two guidelines and consensus statements met eligibility criteria for the primary search; 14 studies were identified for Clinical Question 4.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients should have a family history taken and recorded that includes details of cancers in first- and second-degree relatives and the patient\'s ethnicity. When more than one gene is relevant based on personal and/or family history, multigene panel testing should be offered. When considering what genes to include in the panel, the minimal panel should include the more strongly recommended genes from Table 1 and may include those less strongly recommended. A broader panel may be ordered when the potential benefits are clearly identified, and the potential harms from uncertain results should be mitigated. Patients who meet criteria for germline genetic testing should be offered germline testing regardless of results from tumor testing. Patients who would not normally be offered germline genetic testing based on personal and/or family history criteria but who have a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant identified by tumor testing in a gene listed in Table 2 under the outlined circumstances should be offered germline testing.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/molecular-testing-and-biomarkers-guidelines.

BACKGROUND: A study was designed to investigate whether the coronary artery disease polygenic risk score (CAD-PRS) may guide lipid-lowering treatment initiation as well as deferral in primary prevention beyond established clinical risk scores.
RESULTS: Participants were 311 799 individuals from the UK Biobank free of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and lipid-lowering treatment at baseline. Participants were categorized as statin indicated, statin indication unclear, or statin not indicated as defined by the European and US guidelines on statin use. For a median of 11.9 (11.2-12.6) years, 8196 major coronary events developed. CAD-PRS added to European-Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (European-SCORE2) and US-Pooled Cohort Equation (US-PCE) identified 18% and 12% of statin-indication-unclear individuals whose risk of major coronary events were the same as or higher than the average risk of statin-indicated individuals and 16% and 12% of statin-indicated individuals whose major coronary event risks were the same as or lower than the average risk of statin-indication-unclear individuals. For major coronary and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events, CAD-PRS improved C-statistics greater among statin-indicated or statin-indication-unclear than statin-not-indicated individuals. For atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events, CAD-PRS added to the European evaluation and US equation resulted in a net reclassification improvement of 13.6% (95% CI, 11.8-15.5) and 14.7% (95% CI, 13.1-16.3) among statin-indicated, 10.8% (95% CI, 9.6-12.0) and 15.3% (95% CI, 13.2-17.5) among statin-indication-unclear, and 0.9% (95% CI, 0.6-1.3) and 3.6% (95% CI, 3.0-4.2) among statin-not-indicated individuals.
CONCLUSIONS: CAD-PRS may guide statin initiation as well as deferral among statin-indication-unclear or statin-indicated individuals as defined by the European and US guidelines. CAD-PRS had little clinical utility among statin-not-indicated individuals.