BACKGROUND: When a pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation is identified in a family, cascade genetic testing of family members is recommended since the results may inform screening or treatment decisions in men and women. However, rates of cascade testing are low, and men are considerably less likely than women to pursue cascade testing. To facilitate cascade testing in men, we designed a Web-based genetic education tool that addressed barriers to cascade testing, was individually tailored, delivered proactively, and could be used in lieu of pretest genetic counseling to streamline the cascade testing process.
METHODS: We randomized 63 untested men from hereditary cancer families to Web-based genetic education (WGE) versus enhanced usual care (EUC). WGE participants were provided access to a genetic education website after which they could accept or decline genetic testing or opt for pretest genetic counseling. EUC participants received an informational brochure and a letter informing them of their eligibility for genetic testing and recommending they schedule genetic counseling. The primary outcome was the uptake of genetic testing.
RESULTS: Men in the WGE group were more likely to complete genetic counseling and/or genetic testing (43% vs. 12.1%; χ2 [n = 63, df = 1] = 7.77, p = 0.005). WGE participants were also more likely to complete genetic testing compared to men in the EUC group (30% vs. 9.1%; χ2 [n = 63, df = 1] = 4.46, p = 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary trial suggests that a streamlined approach to genetic testing using proactively delivered genetic education may reduce barriers to cascade testing for at-risk men, leading to increased uptake. These results should be interpreted cautiously given the select sample and high rate of non-response.

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer is a well-known genetic condition, inherited mainly in an autosomal dominant way, which elevates the risk of developing malignancies at a young age in heterozygous carriers. Advances in new generation sequencing have enabled medical professionals to determine whether a patient is harbouring mutations in moderate- or high penetrance susceptibility genes. We conducted a retrospective analysis among 275 patients who underwent genetic counselling and multigene panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome in our department. From these patients 74.5% (205/275) were affected by some type of malignancy, while the remaining 25.5% (70/275) had a positive family history of different cancers, suggesting a genetic predisposition. These tests confirmed a genetic variant in 29.8% and 28.6% of these patient groups respectively. The results also mirrored our general knowledge concerning the genetic background of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, as variants in either one of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes proved to be the most common cause among our patients with 41.5%. Our test also detected a novel mutation in the CDH1 gene and three patients with double heterozygosity in two different susceptibility genes. This study demonstrates the relevance of genetic counselling and non-BRCA gene sequencing among cancer patients and patients who fulfil the criteria for genetic testing, while also providing important details about the genetic profile of Hungarian patients.

BACKGROUND: Germline breast cancer susceptibility gene (gBRCA) mutation in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) is not common in clinical practice. Therefore, factors that efficiently show gBRCA mutations and the real-world outcomes of olaparib maintenance therapy have not been fully established. In the present study, we clarified the indicators for the effective detection of gBRCA mutation and the efficacy and safety of olaparib as maintenance therapy.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 84 patients with PC who underwent gBRCA testing (BRACAnalysis, Myriad Genetics, Salt Lake City, UT, USA) at our institute between January 2021 and March 2022. For each patient, clinical data were extracted from medical records.
RESULTS: The median patient age was 64 y (29-85 y), and 41 patients (48.8%) were male. The gBRCA mutations were identified in 10 (11.9%) patients; two patients had BRCA1 mutation and eight had BRCA2 mutation. All patients with gBRCA mutation had a family history of any cancer, and eight of them had a family history of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer syndrome (HBOC)-related cancer. The gBRCA mutation rate was higher for patients with PC with a family history of HBOC-related cancer compared to that in patients with PC having a family history of other cancers and no family history of cancer (22.9% vs. 4.1%; P = 0.014). In our study, eight out of 10 patients with gBRCA-positive PC received olaparib after platinum-based chemotherapy. The best responses to platinum-based chemotherapy included a complete response in one patient (12.5%) and a partial response in seven patients (87.5%). The median duration of treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy plus olaparib was 17.5 months (8-87 months), and the duration of treatment with olaparib maintenance therapy was 11 months (1-30 months). During olaparib maintenance therapy, three patients showed no disease progression. One of these three patients underwent conversion surgery after receiving olaparib for 12 months.
CONCLUSIONS: The gBRCA testing should be considered proactively, especially in patients with PC with a family history of HBOC-related cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Although BRCA1/2 is most frequently associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), many other related genes have been implicated. Therefore, we investigated the prevalence of non-BRCA1/2 genes associated with hereditary cancer predisposition in BRCA1/2-negative patients from the Department of Genetic Medicine and Services with breast and ovarian cancer using a multi-gene panel (MGP) analysis.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective MGP analysis (National Cancer Center Onco-Panel for Familial Cancer; NOP_FC) in BRCA1/2-negative patients with breast, ovarian, and overlapping breast/ovarian cancers who visited our genetic counseling between April 2004 and October 2022.
RESULTS: NOP_FC was performed in 128 of the 390 BRCA test-negative cases (117 breast cancer, 9 ovarian cancer, and 2 overlapping breast/ovarian cancer cases). Among the BRCA1/2-negative patients, nine (7.7%) with breast cancer and one (11%) with ovarian cancer had pathogenic variants (PVs) in non-BRCA1/2 genes associated with breast and ovarian cancers, respectively. Five patients had PVs in RAD51D, two in PALB2, one in BARD1, one in ATM, and one in RAD51C.
CONCLUSIONS: Additional MGP testing of germline genes associated with hereditary cancer predisposition syndrome in BRCA1/2-negative breast and ovarian cancer patients revealed PVs in non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer- and ovarian cancer-related genes in 7.7% of breast cancer and 11% of ovarian cancer. Therefore, additional testing may provide useful information for subsequent risk-reducing surgery and surveillance in BRCA1/2-negative patients.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) predisposes women to an increased risk mainly of breast and tubo-ovarian cancer. The aim of the study is to investigate whether being diagnosed with HBOC syndrome is itself a risk factor for sexual dysfunction.
METHODS: An ad hoc questionnaire, including baseline demographic and clinical data, and the Sexual Function Questionnaire 28 (SFQ28) were administered to HBOC female carriers (study group) and to a control group.
RESULTS: After propensity score matching (1:1), we enrolled 202 women, 101 in the study group and 101 in the control group. In a multivariate analysis, we finally found that menopausal status was the only risk factor for a significant low score in the domains Desire (HR 0.66; CI95% 0.47-0.93; p = 0.017), Arousal (Lubrication) (HR 0.52; CI95% 0.34-0.80; p = 0.003), Arousal (Cognitive) (HR 0.64; CI95% 0.44-0.95; p = 0.027), and Orgasm (HR 0.33; CI95% (0.16-0.70; p = 0.004), independent of risk-reducing surgery for gynecological malignancy. Psycho-oncology support is a protective factor for the Enjoyment domain (HR 1.38; CI95% 1.05-1.81; p = 0.022).
CONCLUSIONS: HBOC syndrome itself does not affect SFQ28 domains, while menopausal status significantly influences sexual health, with potential mitigating effects of psycho-oncological support.

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.

BACKGROUND: Tailored, preventive cancer care requires the identification of pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) among potentially at-risk blood relatives (BRs). Cascade testing is carried out for BRs of probands who are positive for PGVs of an inherited cancer but not for negative probands. This study was conducted to examine the prevalence of PGVs for BRs of PGV-negative probands.
METHODS: PGV prevalence was assessed for 682 BRs of 281 probands with BRCA1/BRCA2 wild-type hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome.
RESULTS: PGVs were discovered in 22 (45.8%) of the 48 BRs of the PGV-positive probands and in 14 (2.2%) of 634 BRs of the PGV-negative probands. Eleven PGVs on high-risk BRCA1, BRCA2, and TP53 genes were present only in BRs and not in the probands (probands vs BRs in Fisher exact test; p = 0.0104; odds ratio [OR] = 0.000 [0.000-0.5489 of 95% confidence interval]), partly due to the nature of the selection criteria. The enrichment of high-risk PGVs among BRs was also significant as compared with a non-cancer East Asian population (p = 0.0016; OR = 3.0791 [1.5521-5.6694]). PGV prevalence, risk class of gene, and genotype concordance were unaffected by the cancer history among BRs.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings imply the necessity to construct a novel testing scheme to complement cascade testing.