Seifert Bryce A, O'Daniel Julianne M, Amin Krunal, Marchuk Daniel S, Patel Nirali M, Parker Joel S, Hoyle Alan P, Mose Lisle E, Marron Andrew, Hayward Michele C, Bizon Christopher, Wilhelmsen Kirk C, Evans James P, Earp H Shelton, Sharpless Norman E, Hayes D Neil, Berg Jonathan S
Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, U.S.A.
Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, U.S.A.
Clin Cancer Res. 2016 Aug 15;22(16):4087-4094. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-0015. Epub 2016 Apr 15.
To evaluate germline variants in hereditary cancer susceptibility genes among unselected cancer patients undergoing tumor-germline sequencing.
Germline sequence data from 439 individuals undergoing tumor-germline dyad sequencing through the LCCC1108/UNCseq™ (NCT01457196) study were analyzed for genetic variants in 36 hereditary cancer susceptibility genes. These variants were analyzed as an exploratory research study to determine whether pathogenic variants exist within the germline of patients undergoing tumor-germline sequencing. Patients were unselected with respect to indicators of hereditary cancer predisposition.
Variants indicative of hereditary cancer predisposition were identified in 19 (4.3%) patients. For about half (10/19), these findings represent new diagnostic information with potentially important implications for the patient and their family. The others were previously identified through clinical genetic evaluation secondary to suspicion of a hereditary cancer predisposition. Genes with pathogenic variants included ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDKN2A, and CHEK2 In contrast, a substantial proportion of patients (178, 40.5%) had Variants of Uncertain Significance (VUS), 24 of which had VUS in genes pertinent to the presenting cancer. Another 143 had VUS in other hereditary cancer genes, and 11 had VUS in both pertinent and nonpertinent genes.
Germline analysis in tumor-germline sequencing dyads will occasionally reveal significant germline findings that were clinically occult, which could be beneficial for patients and their families. However, given the low yield for unexpected germline variation and the large proportion of patients with VUS results, analysis and return of germline results should adhere to guidelines for secondary findings rather than diagnostic hereditary cancer testing. Clin Cancer Res; 22(16); 4087-94. ©2016 AACRSee related commentary by Mandelker, p. 3987.
评估在接受肿瘤-胚系测序的未经选择的癌症患者中,遗传性癌症易感基因的胚系变异情况。
通过LCCC1108/UNCseq™(NCT01457196)研究对439名接受肿瘤-胚系二元测序的个体的胚系序列数据进行分析,以检测36个遗传性癌症易感基因中的遗传变异。这些变异作为一项探索性研究进行分析,以确定在接受肿瘤-胚系测序的患者胚系中是否存在致病性变异。患者在遗传性癌症易感性指标方面未经过选择。
在19名(4.3%)患者中鉴定出指示遗传性癌症易感性的变异。对于大约一半(10/19)的患者,这些发现代表了新的诊断信息,可能对患者及其家庭具有重要意义。其他变异是先前通过因怀疑遗传性癌症易感性而进行的临床基因评估确定的。具有致病性变异的基因包括ATM、BRCA1、BRCA2、CDKN2A和CHEK2。相比之下,相当一部分患者(178名,40.5%)具有意义未明的变异(VUS),其中24名患者在与所患癌症相关的基因中具有VUS。另外143名患者在其他遗传性癌症基因中具有VUS , 11名患者在相关和不相关基因中均具有VUS。
肿瘤-胚系测序二元组中的胚系分析偶尔会揭示临床上隐匿的重要胚系发现,这可能对患者及其家庭有益。然而,鉴于意外胚系变异的检出率较低以及VUS结果的患者比例较大,胚系结果的分析和反馈应遵循次要发现的指南,而不是诊断性遗传性癌症检测。临床癌症研究;22(16); 4087 - 94。©2016 AACR见Mandelker的相关评论,第3987页。