Multiple-Gene Panels and the Future of Genetic Testing
- 167 Downloads
Clinical cancer risk assessment is advancing from a past of single-gene testing toward a future of whole-genome sequencing. Cancer-focused panels of 6 to >100 genes have recently emerged into oncology practice, approximately doubling the number of patients for whom a genetic diagnosis can be made. Areas of uncertainty include the degree of cancer risk associated with mutations in specific genes on multiple-gene panels, and the optimal use of cancer risk-reducing interventions based on panel testing results. Clinician expertise is required for appropriate selection and interpretation of multiple-gene panels, and well-designed clinical trials will be essential to realize the full potential of new sequencing technologies.
KeywordsCancer genetics Breast cancer Ovarian cancer BRCA1 BRCA2 Multiple-gene panel Next-generation sequencing Hereditary cancer risk assessment
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Jan Weimer Junior Faculty Chair in Breast Cancer Research and the Suzanne Pride Bryan Breast Cancer Research Fund at Stanford University (to A.W.K.) and the Breast Cancer Research Fund (to J.M.F.). A.W.K. and J.M.F. have received research funding from Myriad Genetics and Invitae.
Compliance with Ethics Guidelines
Conflict of Interest
Allison W. Kurian and James M. Ford have received research funding from Myriad Genetics and Invitae.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 15.Couch FJ, Hart SN, Sharma P, et al. Inherited mutations in 17 breast cancer susceptibility genes among a large triple-negative breast cancer cohort unselected for family history of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014; Electronic publication ahead of print, Dec 1.Google Scholar
- 19.Levy-Lahad E, Lahad A, King MC. Precision medicine meets public health: population screening for BRCA1 and BRCA2. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015; Jan: 107(1).Google Scholar
- 21.••Hall MJ, Forman AD, Pilarski R, Wiesner G, Giri VN. Gene panel testing for inherited cancer risk. J J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2014;12(9):1339–46. Practice guidelines statement on multiple-gene panel testing.Google Scholar
- 27.•Green RC, Berg JS, Grody WW, et al. ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet Med. 2013;15(7):565–74. Guidelines for reporting unexpected findings of comprehensive genome sequencing approaches to patients.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 30.•Laduca H, Stuenkel AJ, Dolinsky JS, et al. Utilization of multigene panels in hereditary cancer predisposition testing: analysis of more than 2,000 patients. Genet Med. 2014;16(11):830–7. Experience of multiple-gene panel testing reported by a large commercial laboratory.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 31.•Tung N, Battelli C, Allen B, et al. Frequency of mutations in individuals with breast cancer referred for BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing using next-generation sequencing with a 25-gene panel. Cancer. 2015;121(1):25–33. Experience of multiple-gene panel testing reported by a large commercial laboratory.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 32.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. 2014. Electronic publication ahead of print, Dec 11Google Scholar
- 36.Castera L, Krieger S, Rousselin A, et al. Next-generation sequencing for the diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer using genomic capture targeting multiple candidate genes. Eur J Hum Genet. Feb 19 X.Google Scholar
- 37.Harrell M, Norquist B, Walsh T, et al. Germline loss-of-function mutations in 15 different DNA repair genes are present in 22 % of 1412 patients with ovarian, peritoneal or fallopian tube cancers not selected for age at diagnosis or family history; abstract presented at the American Society of Human Genetics Annual Meeting. October 2013: Boston, MA.Google Scholar
- 38.Langer L, McCoy H, Moyes K, et al. A study of ovarian cancer patients tested with a 25-gene panel of hereditary cancer genes; abstract presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting. June 2014: Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
- 39.Olopade O, Walsh T, Zheng Y, et al. Nine genes for inherited predisposition to breast cancer among African-American women; abstract presented at the American Society of Human Genetics Annual Meeting. 2013; October:Boston, MA.Google Scholar
- 41.Walsh T, Casadei S, Lee MK, et al. More than 25 % of breast cancer families with wild-type results from commercial genetic testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2 are resolved by BROCA sequencing of all known breast cancer genes; abstract presented at the American Society of Human Genetics Annual Meeting. 2013; October:Boston, MA.Google Scholar
- 42.Yurgelun MB, Allen B, Kaldate RR, et al. Multigene panel testing in patients suspected to have Lynch Syndrome; abstract presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting. 2014; June: Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
- 47.Bradbury AR, Patrick-Miller L, Domchek S. Multiplex genetic testing: reconsidering utility and informed consent in the era of next-generation sequencing. Genet Med. 2014; Electronic publication ahead of print, Jul 17.Google Scholar
- 48.••Bradbury AR, Patrick-Miller L, Long J, et al. Development of a tiered and binned genetic counseling model for informed consent in the era of multiplex testing for cancer susceptibility. Genet Med. 2014;Electronic publication ahead of print, Oct 9. Summary of major ethical and communication challenges related to multiple-gene panel testing, and a review of available clinical trials Google Scholar
- 50.•Kurian AW, Ford JM. Multigene testing in oncology practice: how should we respond? JAMA Oncology. 2015; online publication ahead of print, March 5. Commentary and proposed research agenda for multigene panel testing.Google Scholar