Hans Ehrencrona

Direct letters to relatives at risk of hereditary cancer—a randomised trial on healthcare-assisted versus family-mediated risk disclosure

Abstract Observational studies suggest that direct contact from healthcare to at-risk relatives may increase genetic counselling (GC) uptake as compared to family-mediated risk disclosure, but randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. This study assessed whether the offer of direct letters to relatives at risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) or Lynch syndrome increases GC uptake compared to family-mediated communication alone. Between 2020 and 2023, probands were randomly assigned to family-mediated disclosure (control) or family-mediated disclosure plus the offer of sending direct letters to at-risk relatives (intervention). The primary outcome was GC uptake within 12 months, measured as the proportion of eligible relatives at risk contacting a Swedish cancer genetics clinic. In total, 165 families (median: 4 eligible relatives, range: 1–26) were randomised to control (n = 79) or intervention (n = 86). GC uptake was 67% in controls and 71% in the intervention group (P = 0.23). After adjusting for predefined variables and covariates, there was still no significant difference between groups (OR: 1.24, CI: 0.79–1.95, P = 0.34). Distant relatives had lower uptake than first-degree relatives (OR: 0.27, CI: 0.18–0.40, P < 0.001), while female relatives had higher uptake than males (OR: 2.17, CI: 1.50–3.12, P < 0.001). This is the largest RCT so far investigating direct letters to relatives. GC uptake was high in both groups, and the intervention of direct letters did not show superiority over family-mediated communication alone. Direct letters to relatives may complement family-mediated disclosure in certain situations, but should not be implemented as a general procedure in cancer genetics practices.

Extended genetic analysis and tumor characteristics in over 4600 women with suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

Abstract Background Genetic screening for pathogenic variants (PVs) in cancer predisposition genes can affect treatment strategies, risk prediction and preventive measures for patients and families. For decades, hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) has been attributed to PVs in the genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, and more recently other rare alleles have been firmly established as associated with a high or moderate increased risk of developing breast and/or ovarian cancer. Here, we assess the genetic variation and tumor characteristics in a large cohort of women with suspected HBOC in a clinical oncogenetic setting. Methods Women with suspected HBOC referred from all oncogenetic clinics in Sweden over a six-year inclusion period were screened for PVs in 13 clinically relevant genes. The genetic outcome was compared with tumor characteristics and other clinical data collected from national cancer registries and hospital records. Results In 4622 women with breast and/or ovarian cancer the overall diagnostic yield (the proportion of women carrying at least one PV) was 16.6%. BRCA1/2 PVs were found in 8.9% of women (BRCA1 5.95% and BRCA2 2.94%) and PVs in the other breast and ovarian cancer predisposition genes in 8.2%: ATM (1.58%), BARD1 (0.45%), BRIP1 (0.43%), CDH1 (0.11%), CHEK2 (3.46%), PALB2 (0.84%), PTEN (0.02%), RAD51C (0.54%), RAD51D (0.15%), STK11 (0) and TP53 (0.56%). Thus, inclusion of the 11 genes in addition to BRCA1/2 increased diagnostic yield by 7.7%. The yield was, as expected, significantly higher in certain subgroups such as younger patients, medullary breast cancer, higher Nottingham Histologic Grade, ER-negative breast cancer, triple-negative breast cancer and high grade serous ovarian cancer. Age and tumor subtype distributions differed substantially depending on genetic finding. Conclusions This study contributes to understanding the clinical and genetic landscape of breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility. Extending clinical genetic screening from BRCA1 and BRCA2 to 13 established cancer predisposition genes almost doubles the diagnostic yield, which has implications for genetic counseling and clinical guidelines. The very low yield in the syndrome genes CDH1, PTEN and STK11 questions the usefulness of including these genes on routine gene panels.

Ovarian and Breast Cancer Risks Associated With Pathogenic Variants in RAD51C and RAD51D

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to estimate precise age-specific tubo-ovarian carcinoma (TOC) and breast cancer (BC) risks for carriers of pathogenic variants in RAD51C and RAD51D. Methods We analyzed data from 6178 families, 125 with pathogenic variants in RAD51C, and 6690 families, 60 with pathogenic variants in RAD51D. TOC and BC relative and cumulative risks were estimated using complex segregation analysis to model the cancer inheritance patterns in families while adjusting for the mode of ascertainment of each family. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Pathogenic variants in both RAD51C and RAD51D were associated with TOC (RAD51C: relative risk [RR] = 7.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.60 to 10.19; P = 5 × 10-40; RAD51D: RR = 7.60, 95% CI = 5.61 to 10.30; P = 5 × 10-39) and BC (RAD51C: RR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.39 to 2.85; P = 1.55 × 10-4; RAD51D: RR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.24 to 2.72; P = .002). For both RAD51C and RAD51D, there was a suggestion that the TOC relative risks increased with age until around age 60 years and decreased thereafter. The estimated cumulative risks of developing TOC to age 80 years were 11% (95% CI = 6% to 21%) for RAD51C and 13% (95% CI = 7% to 23%) for RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers. The estimated cumulative risks of developing BC to 80 years were 21% (95% CI = 15% to 29%) for RAD51C and 20% (95% CI = 14% to 28%) for RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers. Both TOC and BC risks for RAD51C and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers varied by cancer family history and could be as high as 32–36% for TOC, for carriers with two first-degree relatives diagnosed with TOC, or 44–46% for BC, for carriers with two first-degree relatives diagnosed with BC. Conclusions These estimates will facilitate the genetic counseling of RAD51C and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers and justify the incorporation of RAD51C and RAD51D into cancer risk prediction models.