Chandrasekaran Dhivya, Sobocan Monika, Blyuss Oleg, Miller Rowan E, Evans Olivia, Crusz Shanthini M, Mills-Baldock Tina, Sun Li, Hammond Rory F L, Gaba Faiza, Jenkins Lucy A, Ahmed Munaza, Kumar Ajith, Jeyarajah Arjun, Lawrence Alexandra C, Brockbank Elly, Phadnis Saurabh, Quigley Mary, El Khouly Fatima, Wuntakal Rekha, Faruqi Asma, Trevisan Giorgia, Casey Laura, Burghel George J, Schlecht Helene, Bulman Michael, Smith Philip, Bowers Naomi L, Legood Rosa, Lockley Michelle, Wallace Andrew, Singh Naveena, Evans D Gareth, Manchanda Ranjit
Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Cancer Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK.
Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London EC1 1BB, UK.
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Aug 27;13(17):4344. doi: 10.3390/cancers13174344.
We present findings of a cancer multidisciplinary-team (MDT) coordinated mainstreaming pathway of unselected 5-panel germline and parallel somatic testing in all women with epithelial-OC and highlight the discordance between germline and somatic testing strategies across two cancer centres. Patients were counselled and consented by a cancer MDT member. The uptake of parallel multi-gene germline and somatic testing was 97.7%. Counselling by clinical-nurse-specialist more frequently needed >1 consultation (53.6% (30/56)) compared to a medical (15.0% (21/137)) or surgical oncologist (15.3% (17/110)) ( < 0.001). The median age was 54 (IQR = 51-62) years in germline pathogenic-variant (PV) versus 61 (IQR = 51-71) in wild-type ( = 0.001). There was no significant difference in distribution of PVs by ethnicity, stage, surgery timing or resection status. A total of 15.5% germline and 7.8% somatic PVs were identified. A total of 2.3% patients had PVs. A total of 11% germline PVs were large-genomic-rearrangements and missed by somatic testing. A total of 20% germline PVs are missed by somatic first -testing approach and 55.6% germline PVs missed by family history ascertainment. The somatic testing failure rate is higher (23%) for patients undergoing diagnostic biopsies. Our findings favour a prospective parallel somatic and germline panel testing approach as a clinically efficient strategy to maximise variant identification. UK Genomics test-directory criteria should be expanded to include a panel of OC genes.
我们展示了癌症多学科团队(MDT)协调的针对所有上皮性卵巢癌(OC)女性进行的未经选择的5基因组合种系和并行体细胞检测的主流化途径,并强调了两个癌症中心种系和体细胞检测策略之间的不一致。患者由癌症MDT成员提供咨询并获得同意。并行多基因种系和体细胞检测的接受率为97.7%。与医学肿瘤学家(15.0%(21/137))或外科肿瘤学家(15.3%(17/110))相比,临床护士专家提供咨询时更频繁地需要>1次咨询(53.6%(30/56))(<0.001)。种系致病性变异(PV)患者的中位年龄为54岁(四分位间距[IQR]=51-62岁),而野生型患者为61岁(IQR=51-71岁)(P=0.001)。PVs在种族、分期、手术时间或切除状态方面的分布没有显著差异。共鉴定出15.5%的种系PVs和7.8%的体细胞PVs。共有2.3%的患者有PVs。共有11%的种系PVs是大基因组重排,体细胞检测未检测到。共有20%的种系PVs被体细胞先检测方法遗漏,55.6%的种系PVs被家族史确定遗漏。接受诊断性活检的患者体细胞检测失败率更高(23%)。我们的研究结果支持前瞻性并行体细胞和种系组合检测方法,作为一种临床有效策略,以最大限度地识别变异。英国基因组学检测目录标准应扩大,以纳入一组OC基因。