gBRCA Testing Research Articles

Clinical significance of germline breast cancer susceptibility gene (gBRCA) testing and olaparib as maintenance therapy for patients with pancreatic cancer

BackgroundGermline breast cancer susceptibility gene (gBRCA) mutation in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) is not common in clinical practice. Therefore, factors that efficiently show gBRCA mutations and the real-world outcomes of olaparib maintenance therapy have not been fully established. In the present study, we clarified the indicators for the effective detection of gBRCA mutation and the efficacy and safety of olaparib as maintenance therapy.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 84 patients with PC who underwent gBRCA testing (BRACAnalysis, Myriad Genetics, Salt Lake City, UT, USA) at our institute between January 2021 and March 2022. For each patient, clinical data were extracted from medical records.ResultsThe median patient age was 64 y (29–85 y), and 41 patients (48.8%) were male. The gBRCA mutations were identified in 10 (11.9%) patients; two patients had BRCA1 mutation and eight had BRCA2 mutation. All patients with gBRCA mutation had a family history of any cancer, and eight of them had a family history of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer syndrome (HBOC)-related cancer. The gBRCA mutation rate was higher for patients with PC with a family history of HBOC-related cancer compared to that in patients with PC having a family history of other cancers and no family history of cancer (22.9% vs. 4.1%; P = 0.014). In our study, eight out of 10 patients with gBRCA-positive PC received olaparib after platinum-based chemotherapy. The best responses to platinum-based chemotherapy included a complete response in one patient (12.5%) and a partial response in seven patients (87.5%). The median duration of treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy plus olaparib was 17.5 months (8–87 months), and the duration of treatment with olaparib maintenance therapy was 11 months (1–30 months). During olaparib maintenance therapy, three patients showed no disease progression. One of these three patients underwent conversion surgery after receiving olaparib for 12 months.ConclusionsThe gBRCA testing should be considered proactively, especially in patients with PC with a family history of HBOC-related cancer.

Real-world tumor BRCA testing patterns and PARP inhibitor use in HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

1113 Background: Testing for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations (BRCAm) aids systemic treatment decisions for patients (pts) with metastatic breast cancer (mBC). This retrospective study explored real-world germline/tumor (g/t) BRCA testing patterns and PARP inhibitor (PARPi) use in US pts with mBC. Methods: Data from pts ≥18 years old diagnosed with HER2-negative mBC from 2014–2022 were captured in the nationwide Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived deidentified database. Patterns and timing of prospective or incidental BRCA testing were compared across mBC subtypes (hormone receptor-positive [HR+ mBC]/triple-negative mBC [mTNBC]) and disease stage (recurrent/ de novo). BRCAm prevalence was compared by testing modality and mBC subtype. PARPi initiation was assessed in pts with mBC diagnosed from 2018 onwards and a positive BRCAm test result. Clinical characteristics were compared by receipt of a BRCA test, testing modality, and PARPi initiation. Real-world overall survival (OS) by PARPi use was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Of 15,006 pts (including 12,349 with HR+ mBC; 1998 with mTNBC), 8178 (54.5%) did not receive any type of BRCA test, 4654 (31.0%) received a gBRCA test, 3075 (20.5%) received a tumor tissue DNA (ttDNA) test, and 1418 (9.4%) received a circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) test. BRCA testing prevalence was numerically higher in pts with mTNBC (n=1164; 58.3%) than in pts with HR+ mBC (n=5323; 43.1%). As expected, testing prevalence was higher with ttDNA than with ctDNA (mTNBC: n=569 [28.5%] vs n=137 [6.9%]; HR+ mBC: n=2339 [18.9%] vs n=1224 [9.9%]). Over 93% of pts (recurrent and de novo) who received a tBRCA test were tested after an mBC diagnosis, and >1/3 were tested after first-line therapy, with median times from diagnosis to a ttDNA and ctDNA test of 127 and 431 days, respectively. Both gBRCA and tBRCA testing rates increased from 2014–2022, and testing occurred earlier in pts with recurrent than de novo disease. Among pts with tBRCAm, 66.0% had HR+ mBC, and 25.6% had mTNBC. BRCA1 mutations were more common in mTNBC (59.0%) than in HR+ mBC (22.9%) tumors. Of 219 pts with tBRCAm tumors who were diagnosed with mBC from 2018 onwards, PARPi was initiated in 39/74 (52.7%) pts with gBRCAm, 15/71 (21.1%) pts who were gBRCAm-negative, and 19/74 (25.7%) pts with gBRCAm status unknown. Among pts with g or tBRCAm and available OS data, median OS was numerically longer in pts who received PARPi (32.3 months [95% CI: 24.2, 47.4], n=128) versus pts who did not (29.0 months [95% CI: 21.9, 31.9], n=204; median follow-up time 23.2 months). Conclusions: While NCCN guidelines recommend gBRCA testing for all pts with mBC, more than half of pts with HER2-negative mBC (56.9% of pts with HR+ mBC) did not receive any BRCA test. Among pts with tBRCAm, ~2/3 had HR+ disease. Despite the potential benefits of PARPi for pts with BRCAm mBC, utilization remained low from 2018–2022.

A cost-utility analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing in high-risk breast cancer patients and family members in Thailand: a cost-effective policy in resource-limited settings.

Screening for germline pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 variants (gBRCA) in high-risk breast cancer patients is known to be cost-effective in high-income countries. Nationwide adoption of genetics testing in high-risk breast cancer population remains poor. Our study aimed to assess gBRCA health economics data in the middle-income country setting of Thailand. Decision tree and Markov model were utilized to assess cost-utility between the testing vs. no-testing groups from a societal and lifetime perspective and lifetime. We interviewed 264 patients with breast/ovarian cancer and their family members to assess relevant costs and quality of life using EQ-5D-5L. One-way sensitivity, probabilistic sensitivity (Monte Carlo simulation), and budget impact analyses were done to estimate the outcome under Thailand's Universal Health Coverage scheme. The predicted lifetime cost and Quality-adjusted Life Years (QALY) for those with breast cancer were $13,788 and 10.22 in the testing group and $13,702 and 10.07 in the no-testing group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for gBRCA testing in high-risk breast cancer patients was $573/QALY. The lifetime cost for the family members of those with gBRCA was $14,035 (QALY 9.99), while the no-testing family members group was $14,077 (QALY 9.98). Performing gBRCA testing in family members was cost-saving. Cost-utility analysis demonstrated a cost-effective result of gBRCA testing in high-risk breast cancer patients and cost-saving in familial cascade testing. The result was endorsed in the national health benefits package in 2022. Other middle-income countries may observe the cost-effective/cost-saving aspects in common genetic diseases under their national health schemes.

MO60-3 Clinical utility of gBRCA testing (BRACAnalysis) for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer

MO60-3 Clinical utility of gBRCA testing (BRACAnalysis) for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer

Barriers to gBRCA Testing in High-Risk HER2-Negative Early Breast Cancer.

Despite the OlympiA trial demonstrating that early-stage, high-risk, HER2- germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation (gBRCAm) positive breast cancer patients can benefit from PARPi in the adjuvant setting, the gBRCA testing rate in early-stage HR+/HER2- patients remains suboptimal compared to that in early-stage TNBC patients. To better understand the perceived barriers associated with gBRCA testing in HR+/HER2- disease, a quantitative survey was conducted across stakeholders (n = 430) including medical oncologists, surgeons, nurses, physician assistants, payers, and patients. This study revealed that while payers claim to cover gBRCA testing, poor clinician documentation and overutilization are key challenges. Therefore, payers place utilization management controls on gBRCA testing due to their impression that clinicians overtest. These controls have led to healthcare professionals experiencing payer pushback in the form of reimbursement limitations and denials. The perceived challenges to gBRCA testing stem from the lack of consensus dictating which patients are high risk and should be tested. While payers define high risk based on the CPS + EG score from the OlympiA trial, HCPs adopt a broader definition including genomic risk scores, lymph node involvement, and tumor grade and size. A dialogue to harmonize risk classification and testing eligibility across stakeholders is critical to address this disconnect and increase gBRCA testing in appropriate patients.

Real world treatment patterns and survival by germline BRCA (gBRCA) mutation status in patients with HER2-negative early breast cancer (eBC) in the US community oncology setting: A retrospective observational study.

e12535 Background: Germline BRCA mutations (gBRCAm) are associated with a higher risk of breast cancer at a younger age. Generally, gBRCA gene testing is performed in patients perceived as high risk for gBRCAm. Olaparib, a targeted poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi), has significantly improved overall survival (OS) in the randomized, double-blind OlympiA trial of patients with HER2-negative gBRCAm and was subsequently approved for the adjuvant treatment of patients with gBRCAm HER2-negative high-risk early breast cancer (eBC) treated with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy. This study examines the real-world patient characteristics, treatment patterns and OS by gBRCA status among patients with HER2-negative eBC in a US community oncology setting prior to olaparib US approval for treatment of eBC. Methods: This retrospective observational study used structured data from The US Oncology Network's iKnowMed database. Adult patients were included if diagnosed with HER2-negative eBC (stage I-III) and if they initiated systemic neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy between January 1, 2012-December 31, 2018 (followed through December 31, 2021). Patients were excluded if they progressed to stage IV within 6 months after neoadjuvant treatment or were diagnosed with another primary cancer. Descriptive analyses assessed patient characteristics, early-stage systemic treatments and OS among patients by gBRCA status. Results: Among 19,258 patients with BC meeting initial criteria, 1436 (7.5%) had a documented gBRCA test result. Among them, 10% had gBRCAm (n = 141, 43% hormone receptor positive [HR+], 57% triple-negative BC [TNBC]), 90% BRCAwt (n = 1294, 70% HR+, 30% TNBC), and 1 had a variant of uncertain significance. Median age at surgery was numerically lower in gBRCAm (43 years) than gBRCAwt (48 years) patients. Treatments included neoadjuvant-only therapy (gBRCAm 58%; gBRCAwt 34%), adjuvant-only therapy (gBRCAm 42%; gBRCAwt 66%) and both neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy (gBRCAwt 0.1%). Median OS in both study cohorts was not reached. Median follow-up from surgery was less than 4 years (gBRCAm 47 months; gBRCAwt 46 months). At 48 months, estimated survival was 95% in gBRCAm and 94% in gBRCAwt patients. Conclusions: In this cohort of patients with HER2-negative eBC, among the 7.5% with a documented gBRCA result, 10% were identified with gBRCAm, reinforcing the need for gBRCA testing. Using structured real-world data through 2021 (prior to PARPi approval for eBC) with limited follow-up of < 4 years, our study found that OS by gBRCA status was similar among patients with HER2-negative eBC. Our further research with chart review data containing granular clinical information looking at intermediate endpoints such as recurrence in eBC is under way.

177P Oncotype DX breast recurrence score (ODX RS) and gBRCAm in pts with HR+/HER2-negative early breast cancer (eBC) in a retrospective cohort

Up to 50% of pts with breast cancer and germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic BRCA variants are missed by current testing guidelines. Timely determination of germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAm) status is integral to facilitating an effective treatment strategy. Prior studies suggest that gBRCAm-associated HR+ HER2-negative eBC has a higher ODX RS vs gBRCA wild type (gBRCAwt). However, data from large cohorts are limited. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the US Electronic Health Record-derived de-identified Flatiron Health database. We selected pts ≥18 years with HR+ HER2-negative eBC, diagnosed from March 2007–October 2022 with a confirmed ODX RS. gBRCA testing rates were calculated by year of eBC diagnosis. Prevalence of gBRCAm was described by ODX RS category (low <11, intermediate 11–25, high >25). A total of 3672 pts with a confirmed ODX RS (category: low n=961; intermediate n=2172; high n=539) were included. Median age was 62 years (IQR 53, 69), 75.6% were white and 83.4% received treatment at community oncology clinics. Of 1163 pts (31.7%) tested, 37 (3.2%) had gBRCAm. Prevalence of gBRCAm was highest in the high ODX RS category (n=14, 7.5%) vs intermediate (n=19, 2.8%) and low (n=4, 1.4%). gBRCA testing increased over time from 2011–2014 (13.7%) to 2019–2022 (32.4%) for eBC pts. The testing rates were similar across ODX RS categories.Table: 177PRates of gBRCA testing in pts with HR+ HER2-negative eBC with a confirmed ODX RS*Rate of gBRCA testing within 6 months of eBC diagnosis2011–20142015–20182019–2022Overall13.7%22.4%32.4%ODX RS High12.1%26.3%30.8%ODX RS Intermediate14.5%21.5%32.9%ODX RS Low12.4%22.2%32.1%*Between 2007 and 2010 only 8 ODX RS tests were performed, and so data are not shown. ODX RS, Oncotype DX Recurrence Score. Open table in a new tab *Between 2007 and 2010 only 8 ODX RS tests were performed, and so data are not shown. ODX RS, Oncotype DX Recurrence Score. In this modern retrospective cohort, ODX RS appeared higher in gBRCAm-associated HR+ HER2-negative eBC vs sporadic/untested pt tumors. Despite an increasing trend in gBRCA testing, around two-thirds of HR+ HER2-negative eBC pts in this cohort did not undergo genetic testing, including 351 pts with high ODX RS who may benefit from newer risk-reducing strategies. Based on the recently demonstrated improved survival from adjuvant olaparib in gBRCAm pts, wider implementation of genetic testing may be warranted in this population.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of germline BRCA mutations in pancreatic cancer patients identifies global and racial disparities in access to genetic testing

Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations (gBRCAm) can inform pancreatic cancer (PC) risk and treatment but most of the available information is derived from white patients. The ethnic and geographic variability of gBRCAm prevalence and of germline BRCA (gBRCA) testing uptake in PC globally is largely unknown. We carried out a systematic review and prevalence meta-analysis of gBRCA testing and gBRCAm prevalence in PC patients stratified by ethnicity. The main outcome was the distribution of gBRCA testing uptake across diverse populations worldwide. Secondary outcomes included: geographic distribution of gBRCA testing uptake, temporal analysis of gBRCA testing uptake in ethnic groups, and pooled proportion of gBRCAm stratified by ethnicity. The study is listed under PROSPERO registration number #CRD42022311769. A total of 51 studies with 16 621 patients were included. Twelve of the studies (23.5%) enrolled white patients only, 10 Asians only (19.6%), and 29 (56.9%) included mixed populations. The pooled prevalence of white, Asian, African American, and Hispanic patients tested per study was 88.7%, 34.8%, 3.6%, and 5.2%, respectively. The majority of included studies were from high-income countries (HICs) (64; 91.2%). Temporal analysis showed a significant increase only in white and Asians patients tested from 2000 to present (P < 0.001). The pooled prevalence of gBRCAm was: 3.3% in white, 1.7% in Asian, and negligible (<0.3%) in African American and Hispanic patients. Data on gBRCA testing and gBRCAm in PC derive mostly from white patients and from HICs. This limits the interpretation of gBRCAm for treating PC across diverse populations and implies substantial global and racial disparities in access to BRCA testing in PC.

All HER2-negative breast cancer patients need gBRCA testing: cost-effectiveness and clinical benefits

BackgroundThe OlympiA trial demonstrated the benefits of adjuvant usage of olaparib for high-risk patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer (BC) and germline BRCA (gBRCA) mutation. This provoked thoughts on the clinical criteria of gBRCA testing. This study aims to estimate the costs and benefits of gBRCA testing and adjuvant olaparib therapy for patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and hormone-receptor (HR)-positive and HER2-negative BC in China and the United States of America (USA).MethodsWe used a Markov chain decision tree analytic model to compare three gBRCA screening policies in China and the USA: (1) no gBRCA testing; (2) selected gBRCA testing and (3) universal gBRCA testing for nonmetastatic TNBC and HR-positive HER2-negative BC patients. We modelled the benefit of systemic therapy and risk-reducing surgeries among patients identified with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1 and BRCA2.ResultsChanging from the selected gBRCA testing to the universal gBRCA testing in TNBC patients is cost-effective, with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) being 10991.1 and 56518.2 USD/QALY in China and the USA, respectively. Expanding universal gBRCA testing to HR-positive HER2-negative BC and TNBC patients has ICERs of 2023.3 and 16611.1 USD/QALY in China and the USA, respectively.DiscussionBy performing gBRCA testing on all HER2-negative BC patients, adjuvant olaparib can be offered to high-risk patients with a PV in BRCA1 or BRCA2. These patients are also candidates for risk-reducing surgeries, an important aspect of their survivorship care, and these interventions can improve survival outcomes. With the willingness-to-pay thresholds being 31,500.0 and 100,000.0 USD per QALY gained in China and the USA, respectively, universal gBRCA testing is likely cost-effective for all HER2-negative BC patients. This simplified criterion of gBRCA testing for BC is recommended for adoption by current guidelines in China and the USA.

Predicting the likelihood of a BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant being somatic by testing only tumour DNA in non-mucinous high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer

AimsClinical guidelines recommend testing both germline and tumour DNA for BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs) in non-mucinous high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (NMEOC). In this study, we show that some tumour BRCA1/2...

BRCA1/2 in non-mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer: tumour with or without germline testing?

National guidelines recommend testing all cases of non-mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer (NMEOC) for germline (blood) and somatic (tumour) BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs). We performed paired germline and somatic BRCA1/2 testing in consecutive cases of NMEOC (n = 388) to validate guidelines. Thirty-four somatic BRCA1/2 (sBRCA) PVs (9.7%) were detected in 350 cases with germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA) wild-type. All sBRCA PVs were detected in non-familial cases. By analysing our regional germline BRCA1/2 database there were 92/1114 (8.3%) gBRCA PVs detected in non-familial cases (only 3% ≥70 years old) and 245/641 (38.2%) in familial cases. Germline non-familial cases were dominated by BRCA2 in older women (8/271 ≥ 70 years old, all BRCA2). The ratio of sBRCA-to-gBRCA was ≤1.0 in women aged <70 years old, compared to 5.2 in women aged ≥70 years old (P = 0.005). The likelihood of missed germline BRCA1/2 PVs (copy-number variants missed on most somatic assays) by testing only tumour DNA was 0.4% in women aged ≥70 years old. We recommend reflex tumour BRCA1/2 testing in all NMEOC cases, and that gBRCA testing is not required for women aged ≥70 years old with no identifiable tumour BRCA1/2 PV and/or family history of breast, ovarian, prostate and/or pancreatic cancer.

Health outcomes of gBRCA testing strategies for metastatic pancreatic cancer patients.

537 Background: About 4-8% metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) patients have germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAm). Identifying gBRCAm through early testing benefits mPC patients through: 1. better health outcomes when gBRCAm patients receive platinum (plat) based 1st line (1L) chemotherapy compared to non-plat 1L regimen; 2. additional benefit, if eligible, from olaparib (O) maintenance treatment (mTx), which was approved by the FDA for the gBRCAm mPC patients who have not progressed on at least 16 weeks of a 1L plat regimen. Objective: To evaluate the health outcomes of gBRCA testing and treatment strategies among mPC patients using simulation model. Methods: A 3-state partitioned survival model was developed to assess the lifetime (20 year) health outcomes among treatment naïve mPC patients for the following strategies: 1. No gBRCA testing, no O mTx; 2. gBRCA testing before 1L, no O mTx; 3. gBRCA testing before 1L, O mTx; 4. gBRCA testing after 1L, O mTx. Without gBRCAm information before 1L (i.e., strategy 1&amp;4) or if gBRCA negative, 45% mPC patients with good performance status (PS) and 27% with poor PS received 1L plat. We assumed that for gBRCAm patients, if known, 90% with good PS and 50% with poor PS received 1st line plat (i.e., strategy 2&amp;3) in the base case. We assumed gBRCA testing had 100% of sensitivity and specificity. OS and PFS survival curves were extrapolated from pivotal trials. The additional health outcome benefit from O mTx after 16 weeks were modeled using efficacy from POLO trial. Health outcomes were measured by life years (LY) and, after applying health utilities by health state, quality adjusted life years (QALY). Results: The proportion of gBRCAm mPC patients receiving O mTx were 58.7% (4.4% of mPC patients) for strategy 3 vs 30.0% (2.2% of mPC patients) for strategy 4. For gBRCAm mPC patients, no testing generated the least LY and QALY, while testing before 1st line with O mTx resulted in the most. This trend was also observed in the overall cohort of mPC patients with the best outcomes from testing before 1st line with O mTx and worse outcomes from no testing or testing after 1st line with O Mtx. These survival gains are primarily derived by higher proportion of patients on platinum with better survival along with O Mtx gains. Conclusions: mPC patients achieve the highest health benefits by gBRCA testing before 1L treatment followed by O mTx, even with less than 5% mPC patients becoming eligible for O mTx (strategy 3).[Table: see text]

Reliability of Tumor Testing Compared to Germline Testing for Detecting BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations in Patients with Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

Background: BRCA 1/2 mutation status has become one of the most important parameters for treatment decision in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). The aim of this study was to compare tumor DNA with blood DNA sequencing to evaluate the reliability of BRCA tumor testing results. Methods: Patients who were treated for EOC between 2003 and 2019 at the Medical University of Vienna and underwent both germline (gBRCA) and tumor (tBRCA) testing for BRCA mutations were identified. We calculated the concordance rate and further analyzed discordant cases. Results: Out of 140 patients with EOC, gBRCA mutation was found in 47 (33.6%) and tBRCA mutation in 53 (37.9%) patients. Tumor testing identified an additional 9/140 (6.4%) patients with somatic BRCA mutation and negative germline testing. The comparison of germline testing with tumor testing revealed a concordance rate of 93.5% and a negative predictive value of tumor testing of 96.0%. After BRCA variants of uncertain significance were included in the analysis, concordance rate decreased to 90.9%. Conclusion: Tumor testing identified the majority of pathogenic germline BRCA mutations but missed three (2.1%) patients. In contrast, nine (6.4%) patients harboring a somatic BRCA mutation would have been missed by gBRCA testing only.

Underutilization of germline BRCA testing in commercially-insured women diagnosed with ovarian cancer.

5539 Background: Germline BRCA (gBRCA) testing has prognostic, therapeutic, and familial implications for patients with ovarian cancer. Since 2010, national guidelines have recommended universal genetic testing, but few data are available about rates and timeliness of testing or factors associated with testing. Methods: We examined rates of gBRCA testing and the time from index procedure to testing among commercially-insured women aged 18 to 64 with claims for ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancers cancer who received cytoreductive surgery and chemotherapy between 2008-2018. We used logistic regression to assess patient-, clinician-, and practice-level characteristics associated with testing. Results: Overall, the rate of g BRCA testing was 33.9%, increasing from 14.7% in 2008 to 46.4% in 2018; the median time to testing decreased from 280.0 to 72.5 days. Patients who were tested were younger than those who were not (mean [SD] 54.7 [9.9] years vs. 58.1 [11.8] years, P&lt;.001) and had fewer comorbidities (Charlson score ≥2: 3.7% vs. 9.5%, P=0.01). There were no differences in testing rates by US region, rurality of practice location, or medical vs. gynecologic oncology providers. However, testing rates were higher in academic and NCI-designated cancer centers (36.2% and 32.5%, respectively), compared with community practices (25.5%; P&lt;0.001) (Table). In adjusted analyses, lower test rates were associated with older age (aOR=0.97, 95%CI=0.96-0.98), more medical comorbidities (Charlson score ≥2: aOR=0.77, 95%CI=0.61-0.97), and community practices vs. NCI cancer centers (aOR=0.64, 95%CI=0.46-0.88). Conclusions: While the rates and time to testing for gBRCA in patients with new diagnoses of ovarian cancer have improved over time, testing remains underutilized, even among well-insured populations. Future studies should examine barriers to timely genetic testing and identify scalable strategies for increasing testing in women with ovarian cancer, particularly for women treated in community practices.[Table: see text]

Abstract PD10-08: Outcomes of germline BRCA carriers versus non-carriers in the french national metastatic breast cancer ESME cohort 2008-2016

Abstract BACKGROUND: Approximately 5% of breast cancer (BC) patients (pts) carry a deleterious germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAm). Retrospective studies suggest that overall survival (OS) is equivalent between gBRCAm carriers and non-carriers with metastatic BC (MBC). We aimed to use the large ESME multicentre national MBC database to compare outcomes of gBRCAm carriers, gBRCA wild-type (WT) and not tested (NT) pts. METHODS: We used the large ESME MBC database (NCT03275311), a unique national cohort of all consecutive pts who initiated a first-line treatment for MBC between 2008 and 2016 in one of the 18 French Comprehensive Cancer Centers. All pts with data available regarding gBRCA testing were selected for the present analysis. 26 pts with non-BRCA germline mutations were classified in the WT group. The primary endpoint was OS from date of treatment initiation in the 3 groups of patients: gBRCAm, gBRCA WT and gBRCA NT.Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival under first line treatment (PFS1), clinical and biological characteristics of the 3 groups and prognostic factors for OS. Multivariable analyses included the main known prognostic factors (age at MBC, MBC subtype, disease-free interval, presence of visceral disease, number of metastatic sites). They were conducted using Cox proportional analyses. RESULTS: 20624 pts were included in this analysis (414 gBRCAm, 1710 WT, 18500 gBRCA NT). Pts and disease characteristics are summarized in table 1. As expected, patients with gBRCAm were younger and had a higher rate of TNBC and G3 tumors. Median follow-up was 50.5 months (95%CI 49.7-51.5). Non-adjusted median OS was 30.6 months [21.9-34.3] in the gBRCAm group, 35.8 [32.2-37.8] in the WT and 39.3 [38.3-40.3] in NT groups. Median PFS1 was 7.9 months [6.6-9.3] in the gBRCAm group, 7.8 [7.3-8.5] in the WT and 9.7 months [ 9.5-10.0] in the NT groups. In multivariable analyses, OS and PFS were not significantly different between MBC patients with gBRCA and others (respective HRs 1.01 [0.88;1.17], p=0.87 and 0.94 [0.84;1.06], p=0.31). CONCLUSION: In this large scale real-life ESME MBC database analysis, outcomes of gBRCAm carriers with MBC do not differ from non carriers or not tested subgroups, when adjusted for other prognostic factors. Table 1: characteristics of patients and diseasegBRCAm. gBRCA WT. gBRCA NT Pvalue (chi-2)N = 414 N = 1710 N = 18500 Age (years) median [range]45 [23-82]48 [20- 88]61 [22-103]p&amp;lt;0.0001Grade 3 N (%) Missing data202 (57.7) 64598 (41.1) 2545337 (34.5)3036p&amp;lt;0.0001Triple negative breast cancer N (%)158 (38.2)370 (21.6)2331 (12.6)p&amp;lt;0.0001De novo MBC N (%)74 (17.9)359 (21)5914 (32)p&amp;lt;0.0001Disease-free interval (months) median [range]39.0 [-1.5- 425.7]36.3 [-2.1- 549.6]31.8 [-2.9- 657.8]p&amp;lt;0.0001Metastatic sites ≥3 N (%)113 (27.3)349 (20.4)3943 (21.3)p=0.008Visceral metastases N (%)279 (67.4)964 (56.4)10659(57.6)p=0.0002Central Nervous System Metastases N (%)66 (15.9)132 (7.7)1145 (6.2)p&amp;lt;0.0001 Citation Format: Audrey Mailliez, Veronique D'Hondt, Amelie Lusque, Olivier Caron, Luc Cabel, Antony Goncalves, Marc Debled, Laurence Gladieff, Jean-Marc Ferrero, Thierry Petit, Marie-Ange Mouret-Reynier, Jean-Christophe Eymard, Jean-Sébastien Frenel, Thibault De La Motte Rouge, Gaëtane Simon, Suzette Delaloge. Outcomes of germline BRCA carriers versus non-carriers in the french national metastatic breast cancer ESME cohort 2008-2016 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD10-08.

Concordance Between Tumor and Germline BRCA Status in High-Grade Ovarian Carcinoma Patients in the Phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 Trial

Abstract Background PAOLA1 is a phase III study assessing olaparib maintenance therapy in advanced high-grade ovarian carcinoma patients responding to first-line platinum-taxane–based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab as standard of care. Randomization was stratified by treatment outcome and tumor BRCA1/2 status (tBRCA) at screening. Methods tBRCA was tested on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor blocks on 5 French platforms using 2 next-generation sequencing methods based either on hybrid capture or amplicon technology. One of the exploratory objectives was to assess the concordance between germline (gBRCA) and tBRCA testing in French patients. gBRCA testing was performed on blood samples on the same platforms. Results From May 2015 to July 2017, tBRCA tests were performed for 1176 screened patients. Only 52 (4.4%) tumor samples were noncontributive. The median interval between reception of the tumor sample and availability of the tBRCA status result was 37 days (range = 8-260). A pathogenic variant was reported in 27.1% tumor samples (319 of 1176 screened patients). tBRCA and gBRCA testing were performed for 451 French patients with negative results for both tests in 306 patients (67.8%) and positive results for both tests in 85 patients (18.8%). Only 1 large genomic rearrangement of BRCA1 was detected, exclusively in the blood sample. Interestingly, tBRCA testing revealed 6.4% of pathogenic variant (29 of 451) not detected by gBRCA testing. Conclusions tBRCA testing is an appropriate tool with an acceptable turnaround time for clinical practice and a low failure rate, ensuring reliable identification of patients likely to benefit from poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor therapy.

BRCA testing delay during the COVID-19 pandemic: How to act?

Recently, our lab, part of a referral center in Italy, reported its experience regarding the execution of germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA) testing during the first months of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which highlights a substantial reduction (about 60%) compared with the first 2 months of the current year. This evidence appeared to be a lockdown effect due to extraordinary restriction measures to slow down the spread of SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the overall effects of the ongoing pandemic on gBRCA testing in our institution and to understand how COVID-19 has influenced testing after the complete lockdown (March 8–May 5, 2020). Additionally, we compared this year’s trend with trends of the last 3 years to better monitor gBRCA testing progress. This detailed analysis highlights two important findings: (1) gBRCA testing did not increase significantly after the lockdown period (May–October 2020) compared with the lockdown period (March–April 2020), emphasizing that even after the lockdown period testing remained low. (2) Comparing the total tests per year (January–October 2017, 2018, 2019, with 2020), the impact of COVID-19 on gBRCA testing is apparent, with similarities of trends registered in 2017. These evidences reveal a gBRCA testing delay for cancer patients and healthy patients at this moment, and the new era of gBRCA testing in the management of ovarian, breast, pancreas and prostate cancer patients has been seriously questioned due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As consequence, we underline that measures to guarantee oncogenetic testing (e.g., gBRCA testing) along with new diagnostic/clinic strategies are mandatory. For these reasons, several proposals are presented in this study.

Results of a phase II randomized trial of cisplatin +/- veliparib in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and/or germline BRCA-associated breast cancer (SWOG S1416).

1001 Background: PARP inhibitors(i) are effective in BRCA-mutation -associated metastatic breast cancer(MBC). However, there are no studies evaluating PARPi + platin chemotherapy in BRCA wild-type(wt) TNBC. Approximately 1/2 of BRCAwt TNBC demonstrate homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) resulting in a BRCA-like phenotype which might render them sensitive to PARPi. S1416 compared the efficacy of cisplatin plus PARPi veliparib (Vel) or placebo (P) in 3 groups of MBC: gBRCA+; BRCA-like; and non-BRCA-like. Methods: Patients (pts) with metastatic TNBC or g BRCA1/2-associated MBC, who had received &lt; 1 line of prior therapy were treated with cisplatin (75mg/m2) plus Vel or P (300 mg po BID days 1-14), every 3 weeks. All pts underwent central gBRCA testing. A priori established multipronged biomarker panel was used to classify BRCAwt pts into BRCA-like and non-BRCA-like groups, and included myChoice HRD score, somatic BRCA1/2 mutations, BRCA1 methylation and non- BRCA1/2 HR germline mutations. Primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the three pre-defined groups; secondary end-points included objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), toxicity. Results: 323/335 randomized pts were eligible for efficacy evaluation; 31% had received 1 prior chemotherapy for MBC. 248 pts were classified into the three groups: (1) 37 gBRCA+ (2) 101 BRCA-like; (3) 110 non- BRCA-like. Remaining 75 could not be classified due to missing biomarker information. In the gBRCA+ group (which reached 62% of its projected accrual), numerically better PFS was noted with Vel compared to P (HR=0.64; p=0.26) though this difference was not statistically significant. In BRCA-like group improved PFS was noted with Vel vs P (median PFS 5.7 vs 4.3 months HR=0.58; p=0.023, 1 years PFS 20% vs 7%). Numerically better OS (median OS 13.7 vs 12.1 months, HR=0.66; p=0.14) and ORR (45% vs 35%, p=0.38) were noted with Vel vs P in BRCA-like group. Non-BRCA-like group did not show benefit of veliparib for PFS (HR=0.85; p=0.43) neither did the unclassified group (HR=0.97). Grade 3/4 neutropenia (46% vs 19%) and anemia (23% vs 7%) occurred at higher frequency in Vel arm compared to P. Conclusions: Addition of Vel to cisplatin significantly improved PFS and showed a trend towards improved OS for BRCA-like advanced TNBC. Integral biomarkers used in this study identified a subgroup of BRCAwt TNBC who benefited from addition of PARPi to cisplatin; platinum plus PARPi combination should be explored further in BRCA-like TNBC. Clinical trial information: NCT02595905 .

BRCA testing in a genomic diagnostics referral center during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The first person-to-person transmission of the 2019-novel coronavirus in Italy on 21 February 2020 led to an infection chain that represents one of the largest known COVID-19 outbreaks outside Asia. Hospitals have been forced to reorganized their units in response to prepare for an unforeseen healthcare emergency. In this context, our laboratory (Molecular and Genomic Diagnostics Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS) re-modulated its priorities by temporarily interrupting most of the molecular tests guaranteeing only those considered “urgent” and not postponable. In particular, this paper details changes regarding the execution of germline BRCA (gBRCA) testing in our laboratory. A substantial reduction in gBRCA testing (about 60%) compared to the first 2 months of the current year was registered, but the requests have not been reset. The requesting physicians were mainly gynaecologists and oncologists. These evidences further emphasize the new era of gBRCA testing in the management of cancer patients and confirms definitively the integration of gBRCA testing/Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) into clinical oncology. Finally, a re-organization of gBRCA testing in our Unit, mainly related to delayed and reduced arrival of tests was necessary, ensuring, however, a high-quality standard and reliability, mandatory for gBRCA testing in a clinical setting.

Incidence of germline BRCA1/2 mutations in women with tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinomas with and without serous tubal intra-epithelial carcinomas

ObjectiveTo compare the germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation (gBRCA) status in women with high-grade serous tubo-ovarian and primary peritoneal carcinoma with and without serous tubal intra-epithelial carcinomas (serous tubal intra-epithelial...