nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.08.2013 | Epidemiology

Lack of referral for genetic counseling and testing in BRCA1/2 and Lynch syndromes: a nationwide study based on 240,134 consultations and 134,652 genetic tests

verfasst von: P. Pujol, D. Stoppa Lyonnet, T. Frebourg, J. Blin, M. C. Picot, C. Lasset, C. Dugast, P. Berthet, B. Bressac de Paillerets, H. Sobol, S. Grandjouan, F. Soubrier, B. Buecher, R. Guimbaud, R. Lidereau, P. Jonveaux, C. Houdayer, S. Giraud, S. Olschwang, E. Nogue, V. Galibert, C. Bara, F. Nowak, D. Khayat, C. Nogues

Erschienen in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Ausgabe 1/2013

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Based on nationwide data from the French national cancer institute (INCa), we analyzed the evolution of cancer genetics consultations and testing over time, and the uptake of targeted tests in relatives of families with BRCA1/2 or MMR genes mutation. Genetic testing and consultations for familial high-risk individuals are exclusively funded and monitored by the INCa in France. All nationwide cancer genetics centers reported annually standardized parameters of activity from 2003 to 2011. The analysis included a total of 240,134 consultations and 134,652 genetic tests enabling to identify 32,494 mutation carriers. Referral for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) or colorectal cancer predisposition syndromes represented 59 % (141,639) and 23.2 % (55,698) consultations, respectively. From 2003 to 2011, we found a dramatic and steady increase of tests performed for BRCA1/2 (from 2,095 to 7,393 tests/year, P < 0.0001) but not for MMR genes (from 1,144 to 1,635/year, P = NS). The overall percentage of deleterious mutations identified in the probands tested was 13.8 and 20.9 % in HBOC and Lynch syndromes, respectively. Pooled analysis for BRCA1/2 and Lynch syndrome tests showed an inverse relationship between the percentage of mutation detected and the absolute number of tests performed over the time (overall Cochran–Armitage test for trend: P < 0.001). In families with BRCA1/2 or MMR identified mutations, there was an average number of 2.94 and 3.28 relatives performing targeted tests, respectively. This nationwide study shows a lack of referral and genetic testing in Lynch as compared to HBOC syndromes. Only a third of relatives of a proband with a predisposing mutation performed a targeted test. Enhanced information about benefit of genetic testing should be given to clinicians and patients for Lynch syndrome and relatives of a proband carrying an identified predisposing mutation.

Robson M, Offit K (2007) Clinical practice. Management of an inherited predisposition to breast cancer. N Engl J Med 357:154–162CrossRefPubMed

Narod SA (2010) BRCA mutations in the management of breast cancer: the state of the art. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 7:702–707CrossRefPubMed

Lynch HT, Lynch PM, Lanspa SJ et al (2009) Review of the Lynch syndrome: history, molecular genetics, screening, differential diagnosis, and medicolegal ramifications. Clin Genet 76:1–18PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Järvinen HJ, Renkonen-Sinisalo L, Aktán-Collán K et al (2009) Ten years after mutation testing for Lynch syndrome: cancer incidence and outcome in mutation-positive and mutation-negative family members. J Clin Oncol 27:4793–4797CrossRefPubMed

Rebbeck TR, Friebel T, Lynch HT et al (2004) Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy reduces breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the PROSE Study Group. J Clin Oncol 22:1055–1062CrossRefPubMed

Domchek SM, Rebbeck TR (2007) Prophylactic oophorectomy in women at increased cancer risk. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 19:27–30CrossRefPubMed

Lindor NM, Petersen GM, Hadley DW et al (2006) Recommendations for the care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to Lynch syndrome: a systematic review. JAMA 27(296):1507–1517CrossRef

National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) (2012) The NCCN guidelines for detection, prevention and risk reduction. http://www.nccn.org. Accessed 20 Aug 2013

Ropka ME, Wenzel J, Phillips EK et al (2006) Uptake rates for breast cancer genetic testing: a systematic review. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 15:840–855CrossRefPubMed

10.

Cheung EL, Olson AD, Yu TM et al (2010) Communication of BRCA results and family testing in 1,103 high-risk women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 19:2211–2219PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

11.

Patenaude AF, Dorval M, DiGianni LS et al (2006) Sharing BRCA1/2 test results with first-degree relatives: factors predicting who women tell. J Clin Oncol 24:700–706CrossRefPubMed

12.

Trivers KF, Baldwin LM, Miller JW et al (2011) Reported referral for genetic counseling or BRCA 1/2 testing among United States physicians: a vignette-based study. Cancer 117:5334–5343. doi:10.1002/cncr.26166 CrossRefPubMed

13.

Burke W, Culver J, Pinsky L et al (2009) Genetic assessment of breast cancer risk in primary care practice. Am J Med Genet A 149A:349–356PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

14.

Meyer LA, Anderson ME, Lacour RA et al (2010) Evaluating women with ovarian cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: missed opportunities. Obstet Gynecol 115:945–952CrossRefPubMed

15.

Koil CE, Everett JN, Hoechstetter L et al (2003) Differences in physician referral practices and attitudes regarding hereditary breast cancer by clinical practice location. Genet Med 5:364–369CrossRefPubMed

16.

Bellcross CA, Kolor K, Goddard KA, Coates RJ, Reyes M, Khoury MJ (2003) Awareness and utilization of BRCA1/2 testing among U.S. primary care physicians. Am J Prev Med 40:61–66CrossRef

17.

Foretova L, Petrakova K, Palacova M et al (2010) Genetic testing and prevention of hereditary cancer at the MMCI-over 10 years of experience. Klin Onkol 23:388–400PubMed

18.

Hall MJ, Reid JE, Burbridge LA et al (2009) BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in women of different ethnicities undergoing testing for hereditary breast-ovarian cancer. Cancer 115:2222–2233PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

19.

INSEE, Government of France (2011) Population totale par sexe et âge au 1er janvier 2011, France métropolitaine. http://www.insee.fr. Accessed 8 Feb 2011

20.

Eisinger F, Bressac B, Castaigne D et al (2004) Identification and management of hereditary predisposition to cancer of the breast and the ovary (update 2004). Bull Cancer 91:219–237 (in French)PubMed

21.

Olschwang S, Bonaïti C, Feingold J et al (2004) Identification and management of HNPCC syndrome (hereditary non polyposis colon cancer), hereditary predisposition to colorectal and endometrial adenocarcinomas. Bull Cancer 91:303–315 (in French)PubMed

22.

Cohen M, Jacquemier J, Maestro C et al (2011) Recommandations pour la Pratique Clinique : Femmes à risque. Oncologie 13(10–11):618–645 (in French)CrossRef

23.

Bonaïti-Pellié C, Andrieu N, Arveux P et al (2009) Cancer genetics: estimation of the needs of the population in France for the next ten years. Bull Cancer 96:875–900PubMed

24.

Cochran WG (1954) Some methods of strengthening the common x₂ tests. Biometrics 10:417–451CrossRef

25.

Armitage P (1955) Tests for linear trends in proportions and frequencies. Biometrics 11:75–386CrossRef

26.

Petrucelli N, Daly MB, Feldman GL (2010) Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer due to mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Genet Med 12:245–259CrossRefPubMed

27.

Antoniou A, Pharoah PD, Narod S et al (2003) Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case Series unselected for family history: a combined analysis of 22 studies. Am J Hum Genet 72:117–130CrossRef

28.

Mitchell RJ, Farrington SM, Dunlop MG et al (2002) Mismatch repair genes hMLH1 and hMSH2 and colorectal cancer: a HuGE review. Am J Epidemiol 156:885–902CrossRefPubMed

29.

Bonaïti-Pellié C, Eisinger F, Feingold J et al (2005) Hereditary predispositions to colorectal cancer. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 29:701–710CrossRefPubMed

30.

Salovaara R, Loukola A, Kristo P et al (2000) Population-based molecular detection of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 18(2193):2200; Erratum in: J Clin Oncol 2000 18:3456

31.

Foo W, Young JM, Solomon MJ et al (2009) Family history? The forgotten question in high-risk colorectal cancer patients. Colorectal Dis 11:450–455CrossRefPubMed

32.

Singh H, Schiesser R, Anand G et al (2010) Underdiagnosis of Lynch syndrome involves more than family history criteria. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 8:523–529PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

33.

Van Dijk DA, Oostindiër MJ, Kloosterman-Boele WM, Hereditary Tumor Study Group of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre West et al (2007) Family history is neglected in the work- up of patients with colorectal cancer: a quality assessment using cancer registry data. Fam Cancer 6:131–134PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

34.

Easton DF, Bishop DT, Ford D et al (1993) Genetic linkage analysis in familial breast and ovarian cancer: results from 214 families. The breast cancer linkage consortium. Am J Hum Genet 52:678–701PubMedCentralPubMed

35.

Shattuck-Eidens D, Oliphant A, McClure M et al (1997) BRCA1 sequence analysis in women at high risk for susceptibility mutations. Risk factor analysis and implications for genetic testing. JAMA 278:1242–1250CrossRefPubMed

36.

Kwong A, Ng EK, Wong CL et al (2012) Identification of BRCA1/2 founder mutations in Southern Chinese breast cancer patients using gene sequencing and high resolution DNA melting analysis. PLoS ONE 7:e43994PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

37.

Fackenthal JD, Olopade OI (2007) Breast cancer risk associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 in diverse populations. Nat Rev Cancer 7:937–948CrossRefPubMed

38.

Walsh T, Casadei S, Coats KH et al (2006) Spectrum of mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, and TP53 in families at high risk of breast cancer. JAMA 295:1379–1388CrossRefPubMed

39.

Turnbull C, Ahmed S, Morrison J et al (2010) Genome-wide association study identifies five new breast cancer susceptibility loci. Nat Genet 42:504–507PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

40.

Metcalfe KA, Finch A, Poll A et al (2009) Breast cancer risks in women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer who have tested negative for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Br J Cancer 100:421–425PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

41.

Julian-Reynier C, Eisinger F, Evans G et al (2000) Variation in prophylactic surgery decisions. Lancet 356:1687CrossRefPubMed

42.

Lapointe J, Côté C, Bouchard K et al (2012) Life Events may contribute to family communication about cancer risk following BRCA1/2 testing. J Genet Couns. doi:10.1007/s10897-012-9531-9 PubMed

43.

Fischer C, Engel C, Sutter C, German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer et al (2012) BRCA1/2 testing: uptake, phenocopies, and strategies to improve detection rates in initially negative families. Clin Genet 82:478–483. doi:10.1111/j.1399-0004.2011.01788.x CrossRefPubMed

44.

Evans DG, Binchy A, Shenton A et al (2009) Comparison of proactive and usual approaches to offering predictive testing for BRCA1/2 mutations in unaffected relatives. Clin Genet 75:24–32CrossRef

Titel: Lack of referral for genetic counseling and testing in BRCA1/2 and Lynch syndromes: a nationwide study based on 240,134 consultations and 134,652 genetic tests
verfasst von: P. Pujol
D. Stoppa Lyonnet
T. Frebourg
J. Blin
M. C. Picot
C. Lasset
C. Dugast
P. Berthet
B. Bressac de Paillerets
H. Sobol
S. Grandjouan
F. Soubrier
B. Buecher
R. Guimbaud
R. Lidereau
P. Jonveaux
C. Houdayer
S. Giraud
S. Olschwang
E. Nogue
V. Galibert
C. Bara
F. Nowak
D. Khayat
C. Nogues
Publikationsdatum: 01.08.2013
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Ausgabe 1/2013
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2669-9

Springer Medizin

Lack of referral for genetic counseling and testing in BRCA1/2 and Lynch syndromes: a nationwide study based on 240,134 consultations and 134,652 genetic tests

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Labor, CT-Anthropometrie zeigen Risiko für Pankreaskrebs

Viel pflanzliche Nahrung, seltener Prostata-Ca.-Progression

Alter verschlechtert Prognose bei Endometriumkarzinom

Darf man die Behandlung eines Neonazis ablehnen?

Update Onkologie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2013

Erratum to: DNA hypermethylation and clinicopathological features in breast cancer: the Western New York Exposures and Breast Cancer (WEB) Study

Exploring novel targets of basal-like breast carcinoma by comparative gene profiling and mechanism analysis

Effects of sorafenib on energy metabolism in breast cancer cells: role of AMPK–mTORC1 signaling

Paget’s disease of the nipple

Eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4E (eIF4E) expression is associated with breast cancer tumor phenotype and predicts survival after anthracycline chemotherapy treatment

Trends and clinical implications of preoperative breast MRI in Medicare beneficiaries with breast cancer

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Labor, CT-Anthropometrie zeigen Risiko für Pankreaskrebs

Viel pflanzliche Nahrung, seltener Prostata-Ca.-Progression

Alter verschlechtert Prognose bei Endometriumkarzinom

Darf man die Behandlung eines Neonazis ablehnen?

Update Onkologie