Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 7/2019

02.04.2019 | Breast Oncology

Germline Genetic Testing: What the Breast Surgeon Needs to Know

verfasst von: Jennifer K. Plichta, MD, MS, Molly L. Sebastian, MD, Linda A. Smith, MD, Carolyn S. Menendez, MD, Anita T. Johnson, MD, Sussan M. Bays, MD, David M. Euhus, MD, Edward J. Clifford, MD, Mena Jalali, MS, Scott H. Kurtzman, MD, Walton A. Taylor, MD, Kevin S. Hughes, MD

Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Ausgabe 7/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

The American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) sought to provide educational guidelines for breast surgeons on how to incorporate genetic information and genomics into their practice.

Methods

A comprehensive nonsystematic review was performed of selected peer-reviewed literature. The Genetics Working Group of the ASBrS convened to develop guideline recommendations.

Results

Clinical and educational guidelines were prepared to outline the essential knowledge for breast surgeons to perform germline genetic testing and to incorporate the findings into their practice, which have been approved by the ASBrS Board of Directors.

Recommendations

Thousands of women in the USA would potentially benefit from genetic testing for BRCA1, BRCA2, and other breast cancer genes that markedly increase their risk of developing breast cancer. As genetic testing is now becoming more widely available, women should be made aware of these tests and consider testing. Breast surgeons are well positioned to help facilitate this process. The areas where surgeons need to be knowledgeable include: (1) identification of patients for initial breast cancer-related genetic testing, (2) identification of patients who tested negative in the past but now need updated testing, (3) initial cancer genetic testing, (4) retesting of patients who need their genetic testing updated, (5) cancer genetic test interpretation, posttest counseling and management, (6) management of variants of uncertain significance, (7) cascade genetic testing, (8) interpretation of genetic tests other than clinical cancer panels and the counseling and management required, and (9) interpretation of somatic genetic tests and the counseling and management required.
Literatur
1.
Hughes KS. Genetic testing: what problem are we trying to solve? J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(34):3789–91.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Daly MB, Pilarski R, Berry MP, et al. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian. National Comprehensive Cancer Network; July 30, 2018.
3.
2014 Professional Status Survey: Executive Summary. 2014.
4.
Noll A, Parekh JP, Zhou M, et al. Barriers to Llynch syndrome testing and preoperative result availability in early-onset colorectal cancer: a National Physician Survey study. Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2018; 9(9):185.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Hoskovec JM, Bennett RL, Carey ME, et al. Projecting the supply and demand for certified genetic counselors: a workforce study. J Genet Couns. 2018;27(1):16–20.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Childers KK, Maggard-Gibbons M, Macinko J, Childers CP. National distribution of cancer genetic testing in the United States: evidence for a gender disparity in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(6):876–79.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Childers CP, Childers KK, Maggard-Gibbons M, Macinko J. National estimates of genetic testing in women with a history of breast or ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(34):3800–06.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Chen Z, Kolor K, Grosse SD, et al. Trends in utilization and costs of BRCA testing among women aged 18–64 years in the United States, 2003–2014. Genet Med. 2018;20(4):428–34.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Manickam K, Buchanan AH, Schwartz MB, et al. Exome sequencing–based screening for BRCA1/2 expected pathogenic variants among adult biobank participants. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1(5):e182140.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Drohan B, Roche CA, Cusack JC, Jr., Hughes KS. Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and other hereditary syndromes: using technology to identify carriers. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(6):1732–37.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Hall MJ, Olopade OI. Disparities in genetic testing: thinking outside the BRCA box. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(14):2197–2203.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Forman AD, Hall MJ. Influence of race/ethnicity on genetic counseling and testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Breast J. 2009;15 Suppl 1:S56–62.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Halbert CH, Kessler LJ, Mitchell E. Genetic testing for inherited breast cancer risk in African Americans. Cancer Invest. 2005;23(4):285–95.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Beitsch PD, Whitworth PW, Hughes K, et al. Underdiagnosis of hereditary breast cancer: are genetic testing guidelines a tool or an obstacle? J Clin Oncol. 2018:Jco1801631.
15.
Guidelines miss cancer patients who could benefit from genetic testing: Part 1. In: Perspectives in Genetics: Empowering the Medical Community through Education and Insight. Vol 2018. Online: Invitae; 2018.
16.
Syngal S, Furniss C. Germline genetic testing for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma at time of diagnosis. JAMA. 2018;319(23):2383–85.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Pritchard CC, Mateo J, Walsh MF, et al. Inherited DNA-repair gene mutations in men with metastatic prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(5):443–53.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Guo X, Shi J, Cai Q, et al. Use of deep whole-genome sequencing data to identify structure risk variants in breast cancer susceptibility genes. Hum Mol Genet. 2018;27(5):853–59.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Park S, Supek F, Lehner B. Systematic discovery of germline cancer predisposition genes through the identification of somatic second hits. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):2601.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Liang X, Vacher S, Boulai A, et al. Targeted next-generation sequencing identifies clinically relevant somatic mutations in a large cohort of inflammatory breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2018;20(1):88.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Kurian AW, Li Y, Hamilton AS, et al. Gaps in incorporating germline genetic testing into treatment decision-making for early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(20):2232–39.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Trivers KF, Baldwin LM, Miller JW, et al. Reported referral for genetic counseling or BRCA 1/2 testing among United States physicians: a vignette-based study. Cancer. 2011;117(23):5334–43.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Morman NA, Byrne L, Collins C, Reynolds K, Bell JG. Breast cancer risk assessment at the time of screening mammography: perceptions and clinical management outcomes for women at high risk. J Genet Couns. 2017;26(4):776–84.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Tung N, Lin NU, Kidd J, et al. Frequency of germline mutations in 25 cancer susceptibility genes in a sequential series of patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(13):1460–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Maxwell KN, Wubbenhorst B, D’Andrea K, et al. Prevalence of mutations in a panel of breast cancer susceptibility genes in BRCA1/2-negative patients with early-onset breast cancer. Genet Med. 2015;17(8):630–38.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Desmond A, Kurian AW, Gabree M, et al. Clinical actionability of multigene panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk assessment. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1(7):943–51.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Whitworth P, Beitsch P, Arnell C, et al. Impact of payer constraints on access to genetic testing. J Oncol Pract. 2017;13(1):e47–56.CrossRefPubMed
28.
29.
30.
31.
Robson ME, Bradbury AR, Arun B, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement update: genetic and genomic testing for cancer susceptibility. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(31):3660–67.CrossRefPubMed
32.
33.
34.
Beitsch PD, Whitworth PW. Can breast surgeons provide breast cancer genetic testing? An American Society of Breast Surgeons survey. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(13):4104–08.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Hughes KS. Personal community with Myriad Genetics. In: Kevin Hughes M (ed); 2018.
36.
37.
Slavin TP, Van Tongeren LR, Behrendt CE, et al. Prospective study of cancer genetic variants: variation in rate of reclassification by ancestry. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018.
38.
Augusto BM, Lake P, Scherr CL, Couch FJ, Lindor NM, Vadaparampil ST. From the laboratory to the clinic: sharing BRCA VUS reclassification tools with practicing genetics professionals. J Commun Genet. 2018;9(3):209–15.CrossRef
39.
Roberts MC, Dotson WD, DeVore CS, et al. Delivery of cascade screening for hereditary conditions: a scoping review of the literature. Health Affairs (Project Hope). 2018;37(5):801–08.CrossRef
40.
Katapodi MC, Jung M, Schafenacker AM, et al. Development of a Web-based family intervention for BRCA carriers and their biological relatives: acceptability, feasibility, and usability study. JMIR Cancer. 2018;4(1):e7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
Nilsson MP, Emmertz M, Kristoffersson U, et al. Germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 incidentally revealed in a biobank research study: experiences from re-contacting mutation carriers and relatives. J Community Genet. 2018;9(3):201–08.CrossRef
42.
Buchanan AH, Manickam K, Meyer MN, et al. Early cancer diagnoses through BRCA1/2 screening of unselected adult biobank participants. Genet Med. 2018;20(5):554–8.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Mandelker D, Zhang L, Kemel Y, et al. Mutation detection in patients with advanced cancer by universal sequencing of cancer-related genes in tumor and normal DNA vs guideline-based germline testing. JAMA. 2017;318(9):825–35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
44.
45.
Pritzlaff M, Yorczyk A, Robinson LS, et al. An internal performance assessment of CancerGene Connect: an electronic tool to streamline, measure and improve the genetic counseling process. J Genet Couns. 2014;23(6):1034–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
46.
Metadaten
Titel
Germline Genetic Testing: What the Breast Surgeon Needs to Know
verfasst von
Jennifer K. Plichta, MD, MS
Molly L. Sebastian, MD
Linda A. Smith, MD
Carolyn S. Menendez, MD
Anita T. Johnson, MD
Sussan M. Bays, MD
David M. Euhus, MD
Edward J. Clifford, MD
Mena Jalali, MS
Scott H. Kurtzman, MD
Walton A. Taylor, MD
Kevin S. Hughes, MD
Publikationsdatum
02.04.2019
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Ausgabe 7/2019
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07341-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2019

Annals of Surgical Oncology 7/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Breast Oncology

Prevention Therapy for Breast Cancer: How Can We Do Better?

Gastrointestinal Oncology

Impact of Synchronous Versus Metachronous Onset of Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases on Survival Outcomes After Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC): A Multicenter, Retrospective, Observational Study

Gastrointestinal Oncology

Primary Tumor Sidedness is Predictive of Survival in Colon Cancer Patients Treated with Cytoreductive Surgery With or Without Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: A US HIPEC Collaborative Study

Peritoneal Surface Malignancy

Laparoscopic Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (L-CRS/HIPEC) for Perforated Low-Grade Appendiceal Mucinous Neoplasm (LAMN II)

Health Services Research and Global Oncology

Outcomes of Open Versus Minimally Invasive Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy for Cancer: A Propensity-Score Matched Analysis of NSQIP Database

Breast Oncology

Is Breast-Conserving Therapy Appropriate for Male Breast Cancer Patients? A National Cancer Database Analysis

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

16.04.2024 | Infektiologie | Nachrichten

Kein Abstrich bei chronischen Wunden ohne Entzündungszeichen!

10.04.2024 | Postoperative Schmerztherapie | Nachrichten

Chronische Schmerzen nach Op. oft mit neuropathischer Komponente

10.04.2024 | Narbenhernie | Nachrichten

Deutlich weniger Narbenhernien mit der Small-Bites-Technik

09.04.2024 | Appendektomie | Nachrichten

Appendektomie: Vorsicht bei systemischen Glukokortikoiden!
weitere anzeigen

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom CME-Kurs
CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur CME-Kurs
CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis CME-Kurs
CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.