Diagnostic yield of germline genetic testing following tumor testing in prostate cancer patients.

Authors

null

Kingshuk Das

Invitae, San Francisco, CA

Kingshuk Das , Stephen E Lincoln , Nhu Ngo , Daniel Esteban Pineda Alvarez , Shan Yang , Scott T. Michalski , Sarah M. Nielsen , Edward D. Esplin , Robert Luke Nussbaum

Organizations

Invitae, San Francisco, CA, Stanford Univ Medcl Ctr, Stanford, CA, Invitae Corporation, San Francisco, CA

Research Funding

No funding received
None

Background: NCCN guidelines recommend germline testing for patients with localized or advanced prostate cancer meeting family history or clinical/pathologic criteria. However, the guidelines for somatic molecular analysis generally consider advanced disease only, primarily to inform therapy. As the analytical and clinical specifications of both testing modalities differ accordingly, we examined the results of germline testing following prior somatic testing. Methods: We reviewed somatic and germline variants in an otherwise unselected consecutive series of patients who: (a) had a current or previous diagnosis of prostate cancer; (b) had undergone tumor sequencing; and (c) were referred for germline testing. Indications for germline testing included: potential germline origin of somatic test result, treatment or surgical planning, personal or family history, and patient concern. Results: 208 patients met study criteria of whom 81 (39%) harbored a pathogenic germline variant (PGV) in a cancer predisposition gene. Certain genes were more likely to harbor germline variants, and 98% (81) of PGVs were potentially actionable (Table). 9.6% of PGVs were not reported by somatic testing, reflecting analytical limitations of the somatic testing. Of note, 11 patients (14%) had PGVs identified after diagnosis of a subsequent primary malignancy. Conclusions: The high PGV rate of 39% was unexpected, given reported rates of 11.8% in patients with metastatic prostate cancer and 6% in high-risk localized disease (NCCN)--even considering potential clinician ascertainment bias. This finding, the potential clinical utility of 98% of PGVs identified, the significant proportion unreported by somatic testing, and the fraction of patients diagnosed with a PGV after a subsequent malignancy all suggest that germline testing is an underutilized tool in the care of prostate cancer patients and their families.

Germline and somatic findings.

Gene#Findings Total#Germline (%Total)NCCNUtility
BRCA1/214252 (37)YesM,T,C
ATM1910 (53)YesM,C
MSH6,PMS2164 (25)YesM,T,C
CHEK2135 (38)YesM,C
PALB273 (43)YesM,C
NBN53 (60)NoC
BRIP142 (50)NoM,C
CDKN2A51 (20)NoM
Others33 (100)NoVaries
21483

NCCN: NCCN recommended prostate cancer germline panel constituent. Utility: Germline findings associated with management guidelines (M), approved therapy (T), clinical trial eligibility (C). Other genes: CFTR, MITF, RAD51C. Genes without germline findings not shown.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2020 ASCO Virtual Scientific Program

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Cancer Prevention, Risk Reduction, and Genetics

Track

Prevention, Risk Reduction, and Genetics

Sub Track

Germline Genetic Testing

Citation

J Clin Oncol 38: 2020 (suppl; abstr 1591)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.1591

Abstract #

1591

Poster Bd #

83

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

Abstract

2024 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Challenges in patient-centered germline testing delivery for veterans with advanced prostate cancer (APC).

First Author: Daniel H Kwon

First Author: Yifu Shi

First Author: Vineel Bhatlapenumarthi