Skip to Main Content

Hereditary Cancer Syndromes: The Major Players and How to Identify Them

October 22, 2021
  • 00:00Well, I think we'll get started
  • 00:02up so my name is Claire Healy.
  • 00:05I'm one of the managers in this
  • 00:07Milo cancer genetics and prevention
  • 00:09program and we're very excited to
  • 00:11have all of you join us tonight.
  • 00:13This is a two night seminar series
  • 00:16and we've titled it Identifying and
  • 00:18caring for individuals with high
  • 00:20risk and inherited cancer syndrome
  • 00:23and the goal of this seminar series
  • 00:25is really to help provide some
  • 00:26information to our colleagues in the
  • 00:28community on how to recognize patients.
  • 00:30At elevated risk to develop cancer
  • 00:33and that those who may have an
  • 00:37underlying hereditary cancer risk.
  • 00:38There will be utilizing their
  • 00:41Q&A feature for questions,
  • 00:42so feel free to type your questions
  • 00:44in as the talks goes on and we will
  • 00:48plan to have a question and answer
  • 00:50session at the end with our speaker,
  • 00:53so I'll introduce our speaker
  • 00:54and then turn things over to her.
  • 00:56So tonight we're pleased to welcome
  • 00:58Amy Kelly and Amy received her Masters
  • 01:01degree in genetic counseling from the
  • 01:04ICANN School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.
  • 01:06This band with a smile.
  • 01:07Oh cancer genetics and prevention
  • 01:09program for four years and she's one
  • 01:12of our more experienced counselors
  • 01:14at a genetic counselor to level
  • 01:16and her research interests include
  • 01:18hereditary pancreatic cancer.
  • 01:20So we're thrilled to have Amy and
  • 01:22Amy thank you for joining us.
  • 01:23I'll turn it over to you.
  • 01:27Great, thanks so much Claire
  • 01:29for the introduction.
  • 01:30Good evening everyone.
  • 01:32I'm very excited to be talking
  • 01:34to you about hereditary cancer
  • 01:35and things to look for and things
  • 01:38to consider when thinking about
  • 01:40a referral to harass her cancer.
  • 01:42So I am just going to share my screen.
  • 01:59Amy, I'm not seeing your slides. Yep,
  • 02:02I just put it on pause just for one. OK.
  • 02:08And.
  • 02:13These things always take a second day.
  • 02:15OK, there we go. Great OK perfect.
  • 02:22So just for the agenda today,
  • 02:25what I want to go over as I want to review
  • 02:28referral guidelines for hereditary cancer,
  • 02:30I want to review the more common
  • 02:33hereditary cancer indications.
  • 02:34Then I want to review a couple of more
  • 02:36rare hereditary cancer indications,
  • 02:38then talk about self pay,
  • 02:40genetic testing and also direct
  • 02:41to consumer genetic testing and
  • 02:43talk about some of the practical
  • 02:45practical aspects of genetic casting.
  • 02:47Why someone may want to have genetic
  • 02:50testing and talk about genetic counseling.
  • 02:53As a whole.
  • 02:55So to start talking about
  • 02:57hereditary breast cancer,
  • 02:58so we cannot talk about hereditary
  • 03:01cancer without talking about BRCA
  • 03:03one and BRCA 2 related to hereditary
  • 03:06breast and ovarian cancer syndrome.
  • 03:09These genes are probably the poster
  • 03:12children of hereditary cancer
  • 03:14testing and I know that everyone
  • 03:16here has heard about them before.
  • 03:18As we know they make up mutations
  • 03:21in these genes.
  • 03:22Germline mutations in these genes
  • 03:24are associated with a high risk of
  • 03:26breast cancer in women which depends
  • 03:28slightly dependent on BRCA one or
  • 03:30BRCA 2 but the risk is between 50
  • 03:32to 75% lifetime risk and also a
  • 03:34significantly increased risk of
  • 03:36ovarian cancer in women with again
  • 03:39arranged depending on the gene but
  • 03:41between 15 up to 60% lifetime risk.
  • 03:44So definitely significant lifetime risks and.
  • 03:48This this I mentioned.
  • 03:50These jeans are the poster children
  • 03:51of why we do genetic testing.
  • 03:53Is that even though these are
  • 03:55considered to be high risk genes,
  • 03:56there are management guidelines.
  • 03:58There's screening options for women
  • 04:00who test positive for a mutation,
  • 04:02BRCA one and BRCA 2 in terms of beginning
  • 04:06breast imaging at a younger age.
  • 04:08Adding on breast MRI for more
  • 04:11sensitive imaging.
  • 04:12Prophylactic bilateral mastectomy's.
  • 04:13I feel like they're often talked
  • 04:15about in the media at once.
  • 04:17Part of Angelina Jolie.
  • 04:18Is an option women decided to pursue and
  • 04:21of course and of course prophylactic
  • 04:23bilateral salpingo over ectomy to be
  • 04:25preventative against ovarian cancer.
  • 04:27So in the advent of genetic testing for
  • 04:30these genes and establishing guidelines
  • 04:32you know women and other people
  • 04:34who are at higher risk of pressure,
  • 04:36right cancer have really been able
  • 04:38to take this information and use
  • 04:41it to actually lengthen their life
  • 04:43and have a better quality of life.
  • 04:45So really we can't.
  • 04:46We can't talk about hereditary
  • 04:47cancer without talking about these.
  • 04:492 genes.
  • 04:51However.
  • 04:53We are now past the era of only
  • 04:56testing BRCA one and BRCA 2.
  • 04:59It's not uncommon for me to see a
  • 05:02patient and say oh I'm here for the
  • 05:05the Braca test but now you know,
  • 05:08especially since about 2015 now.
  • 05:12Our testing includes many other genes
  • 05:15that we now know of relating to
  • 05:18hereditary risk of breast cancer and
  • 05:21we know that these genes they they
  • 05:23can be arranged so some of these.
  • 05:25And broke up a little categories
  • 05:27but BRCA one and two are related to
  • 05:30are considered a high risk breast
  • 05:32cancer gene and there's other
  • 05:33genes that fall into that
  • 05:35category as well that also have guidelines.
  • 05:38Now some of these higher risk
  • 05:40genes often have other features
  • 05:42that are uncommon or more rare.
  • 05:44For example, the gene TP 53.
  • 05:47Many people have heard of related
  • 05:49to leave from many syndrome which is
  • 05:51most characteristic of early onset
  • 05:54sarcomas or early onset osteosarcomas.
  • 05:56Very young breast cancer
  • 05:58in childhood cancers.
  • 06:00So not every single high risk gene is
  • 06:03necessarily a gene of interest for a
  • 06:06woman who has early onset breast cancer.
  • 06:08But with the advent of larger
  • 06:11testing we can now test for these
  • 06:13genes all the same time.
  • 06:15And what we now know is there are
  • 06:17other genes that fall into more of the
  • 06:20moderate risk which would be ATM and CHEK 2.
  • 06:23You can see in the middle and the
  • 06:25blue column there you know the risk.
  • 06:27Ranges between 20 to 40% lifetime risk.
  • 06:29You can see in the high risk category PAL B2,
  • 06:33which has been in the news.
  • 06:34More recently we're getting a
  • 06:36lot of messages about PAL B2,
  • 06:38but we consider to be a moderate
  • 06:40to high risk breast cancer gene,
  • 06:42which is why it's in the high
  • 06:45risk category where the risk can
  • 06:47be upwards of 58% lifetime risk.
  • 06:49So there are other genes that
  • 06:51we definitely want to be testing
  • 06:54individuals for if they have a family.
  • 06:57History that's concerning.
  • 06:58For hereditary breast cancer.
  • 07:00And now there's you see in the green
  • 07:02the green column there are genes
  • 07:04that have an unknown risk of breast
  • 07:06cancer because as we've studied genes,
  • 07:09and as we've learned more about genes,
  • 07:11the risk is sometimes unclear where the
  • 07:13there might be literature suggesting
  • 07:15an increased risk of breast cancer,
  • 07:18but maybe not enough to be
  • 07:20significant or more data is needed.
  • 07:22So some of these genes we off
  • 07:25we can are included on genetic.
  • 07:27Testing and this again just just
  • 07:31shows the range.
  • 07:32Specifically,
  • 07:32I would say the the major ones that
  • 07:35we would test for like ATM Chek 2,
  • 07:37PALB 2,
  • 07:38where the the lighter blue is the
  • 07:40higher end end of the range and
  • 07:43the darker blue is the lower end
  • 07:45of the range so you can see.
  • 07:48Regina is different and that's
  • 07:51that's why we're now past this
  • 07:52era of only doing testing for BRCA
  • 07:54one and BRCA 2 because these genes
  • 07:57some of them do have significant
  • 07:59risks and most importantly we have
  • 08:01guidelines for screening.
  • 08:04Now this is sometimes a very common thing
  • 08:07that we will see with with patients.
  • 08:09Usually 1-2 testing has been
  • 08:12around for at least 20 years,
  • 08:14so it's not uncommon for for patients to say,
  • 08:17oh, I've already had this test.
  • 08:19I had this test in 2012.
  • 08:21It was it was negative,
  • 08:23so I was often common to see
  • 08:26a test report like this.
  • 08:28But back before I would say
  • 08:31definitely before 2014 and probably
  • 08:33a little bit even before then.
  • 08:36Specially BRCA one and two testing
  • 08:38was really limited to sequencing
  • 08:41only and sequencing for BRCA one
  • 08:44and BRCA 2 can detect up to 80% of
  • 08:49detectable pathogenic mutations and
  • 08:52sequencing covers the clinically
  • 08:54important regions of each gene,
  • 08:55including the coding exons,
  • 08:57so that is that is a very informative
  • 09:00test but sequencing cannot detect
  • 09:03large deletions or duplications.
  • 09:06Of your C1 and BRCA 2 so it is
  • 09:09important when a patient has had
  • 09:11genetic testing to know what year
  • 09:14was it and also confirmed with
  • 09:17records because for example in this
  • 09:19case it says BRCA one and BRCA
  • 09:221 sequencing BRCA 2 sequencing.
  • 09:24No mutation detected but this test
  • 09:27would not include what we consider
  • 09:31large rearrangement analysis.
  • 09:33Which is on,
  • 09:34but you can say he see here BRCA one
  • 09:37and BRCA 2 full gene rearrangement also
  • 09:40sometimes called deletion duplication
  • 09:42which detects intragenic deletions
  • 09:45and duplications at at single exons.
  • 09:48Some people also call this a the
  • 09:51Bart test because back until 2013,
  • 09:55Myriad Genetics had the patent
  • 09:56on BRCA one and two,
  • 09:58so their actual test name for BRCA one
  • 10:01and two large rearrangement testing.
  • 10:04Was Bart so some people might.
  • 10:07You might hear patients talking
  • 10:08about bar testing.
  • 10:09You might hear about bar testing.
  • 10:11Bart is just a name that Myriad gave
  • 10:15their own tasks for large rearrangement.
  • 10:18But now that Myriad Genetics
  • 10:20don't have the patent,
  • 10:21there's plenty.
  • 10:22There's many other labs
  • 10:23doing doing this test,
  • 10:25and nowadays it's standard
  • 10:26of care when we do.
  • 10:28BRCA one and two testing to do full gene
  • 10:31sequencing and deletion duplication.
  • 10:34So what's also important is
  • 10:36that if a patient reports BRC
  • 10:39wanted to testing prior 2013,
  • 10:41one is possible they may have only
  • 10:44had BRCA one and two sequencing
  • 10:46and not deletion duplication.
  • 10:48But even if they had full gene
  • 10:51sequencing and deletion duplication,
  • 10:53updated genetic testing is likely
  • 10:55to be indicated because prior
  • 10:572013 those other genes I had
  • 11:00talked about related to hereditary
  • 11:02breast cancer were not included.
  • 11:04On genetic testing,
  • 11:05or at least very rarely included.
  • 11:08So if patients before 2013 say
  • 11:11that they had negative testing in,
  • 11:14likely is worth or a new referral
  • 11:16to talk about updated testing,
  • 11:18and they say 2013.
  • 11:20But even patients that 2014,
  • 11:222015 some of these bigger tests,
  • 11:25these bigger panels were still
  • 11:27coming into play,
  • 11:28but I would say anything before 2013
  • 11:31is definitely worth a new evaluation.
  • 11:34So I'm talking about hereditary
  • 11:35breast cancer. So what?
  • 11:37So what should?
  • 11:38What should you be thinking
  • 11:39about what I would indicate
  • 11:41a referral to cancer genetics?
  • 11:42If we're thinking about
  • 11:44hereditary breast cancer?
  • 11:45So our bread and butter for
  • 11:48guidelines is NCCN guidelines.
  • 11:50Based from the National
  • 11:52Comprehensive Cancer Network,
  • 11:53and these guidelines change every 6
  • 11:55to 12 months before it was focusing
  • 11:58on just pure C1 and BRCA 2 but now
  • 12:01in the advent of panel testing,
  • 12:04moving past the era of just BRCA 1.
  • 12:06And BRCA two we know there are
  • 12:09other genes if someone would
  • 12:11meet clinical guidelines for so.
  • 12:13NCCN used to have a nice package
  • 12:16of just BRCA one and two relating
  • 12:19to hereditary breast cancer.
  • 12:21But now they've broken it up a little
  • 12:24bit into hereditary breast cancer genes,
  • 12:27hereditary ovarian cancer genes correct,
  • 12:30right?
  • 12:31Pancreatic cancer genes and
  • 12:32hereditary prostate cancer genes.
  • 12:34The reason for this is because.
  • 12:36Mutations in BRCA one and BRCA two
  • 12:39are related to hereditary breast
  • 12:41cancer and ovarian cancer in women
  • 12:43and and breast cancer in men but
  • 12:46also they are related to prostate.
  • 12:48Cancer risk in men and pancreatic
  • 12:51cancer risk in men and women.
  • 12:53So that's why NCCM has so many guidelines.
  • 12:56And definitely it's not.
  • 12:58These are in.
  • 12:59Again, they change every 6 to 12 months,
  • 13:00so you are not expected to be
  • 13:02the expert on these guidelines.
  • 13:04Again,
  • 13:05as cancer genetics,
  • 13:06we want to be a resource to you
  • 13:09for your patience.
  • 13:10So just to really distill some of
  • 13:12these guidelines down and just some
  • 13:15suggesting subjects things to think
  • 13:17about when placing a referral.
  • 13:19Is that if someone with a diagnosis
  • 13:23of breast cancer under 50,
  • 13:25anything premenopausal?
  • 13:26I will say you know there there
  • 13:30isn't blue for for testing if
  • 13:32someone is at 50 or at 49 with
  • 13:36no other family history.
  • 13:37It's possible this possible they may
  • 13:39not meet their insurance guidelines
  • 13:41to be protesting to be clinically
  • 13:43indicated and meet insurance guidelines.
  • 13:45Someone would need to be
  • 13:48diagnosed at 45 or younger.
  • 13:50But the reason why I posted before
  • 13:5250s because it is worth a referral,
  • 13:54because sometimes there may be
  • 13:56other factors that we would
  • 13:58want to look into in the family,
  • 14:00including small family size or
  • 14:02limited structure or and also also
  • 14:04just to go through more distant
  • 14:07relatives and take the time to go
  • 14:09through a whole family history.
  • 14:11Now NCCN guidelines recommending
  • 14:13genetic testing for anyone with
  • 14:15triple negative breast cancer at
  • 14:18any age and triple negative breast
  • 14:20cancer is breast cancer that test
  • 14:22negative for the estrogen receptor.
  • 14:24Progesterone receptor and access
  • 14:26of the her two protein.
  • 14:29So this means essentially that the
  • 14:31growth of the cancer is not fueled by
  • 14:33the hormones estrogen and progesterone,
  • 14:35and is also not fueled by the
  • 14:37her two protein.
  • 14:38So triple negative breast cancer tends to be.
  • 14:41Much harder to treat and more
  • 14:43aggressive because it does not
  • 14:45respond to hormonal therapy, so.
  • 14:47NCCN guidelines is now recommending
  • 14:50triple negative breast cancer at any age.
  • 14:53Because triple negative breast
  • 14:54cancer is more likely to have a
  • 14:57hereditary component than non
  • 14:59triple negative breast cancer.
  • 15:00For for most insurance purposes,
  • 15:03since insurance tends to be slower
  • 15:05on the uptake than guidelines
  • 15:07that change every 6 to 12 months,
  • 15:09insurance won't cover testing and
  • 15:11without any other family history unless
  • 15:14someone is diagnosed at 60 or younger.
  • 15:16So something to keep in mind,
  • 15:18but for in terms of a referral, it is def.
  • 15:21I would say indicated,
  • 15:23so something that we can
  • 15:25talk about with the patient.
  • 15:26Anyone with ovarian flopping to her primary
  • 15:30parotta Neil Cancer at any age is genetic.
  • 15:32Testing is indicated.
  • 15:34Men diagnosed with breast cancer at any age.
  • 15:37Metastatic intraductal prostate cancer
  • 15:39diagnosis at any age and this is a
  • 15:42more I would say a newer development
  • 15:45within the last two years where there's
  • 15:47been literature has suggested that
  • 15:49men who have meta static or prostate
  • 15:52cancer that's more locally advanced,
  • 15:55particularly if it's a higher Gleason score.
  • 15:57Which is used to rate aggressiveness
  • 16:00of the prostate cancer.
  • 16:02There is a higher prevalence of
  • 16:04germline mutations in that group,
  • 16:05so that's why for men with metastatic
  • 16:08or intraductal prostate cancer,
  • 16:09regardless of their AIDS,
  • 16:11genetic testing is indicated,
  • 16:13particularly since it can be helpful
  • 16:15in their own treatment options.
  • 16:18Same thing with pancreatic cancer.
  • 16:19This is a relatively new development
  • 16:22since about 2019.
  • 16:23I guess it's not so recent, but all things.
  • 16:26But when I started in order
  • 16:28for pancreatic cancer to be,
  • 16:30someone meet criteria,
  • 16:31they will need additional family history,
  • 16:34which is now not the case.
  • 16:36Pancreatic cancer based on newer literature,
  • 16:38kind of similar to metastatic
  • 16:41prostate cancer,
  • 16:41is more likely to have a germline
  • 16:44mutation than more common cancers,
  • 16:46so given that.
  • 16:47If so,
  • 16:48given that that's why pancreatic
  • 16:50cancer at any age is clinically
  • 16:53indicated for genetic testing.
  • 16:55Also, because there is treatment options.
  • 17:00And also,
  • 17:00if there's three cases of the same
  • 17:03cancer or or associated cancers
  • 17:04on the same side of the family,
  • 17:06so someone who has breast cancer and
  • 17:09two relatives with breast cancer or
  • 17:12someone with breast breast cancer,
  • 17:14some cousin with ovarian cancer,
  • 17:16someone,
  • 17:17a man with prostate cancer and
  • 17:19his mother with breast cancer.
  • 17:20So those cancers all in the family is.
  • 17:23If you were seeing that especially
  • 17:25multiple generations,
  • 17:26multiple relatives is definitely worth over.
  • 17:30Referral.
  • 17:32And finally,
  • 17:33someone who has multiple primary cancers,
  • 17:35such as someone who has breast and
  • 17:38ovarian cancer and bilateral breast cancer,
  • 17:41may be worth the referral.
  • 17:43Bilateral breast cancer if there's
  • 17:45no other family history and with
  • 17:47depending on the age and may not meet
  • 17:50insurance criteria for genetic testing,
  • 17:52but it is worth a referral just for us
  • 17:55to fully flush out the family history
  • 17:57and talk about that with the patient.
  • 18:02So this is similar to the previous slide,
  • 18:05but for just those patients with
  • 18:07only a family history of cancer.
  • 18:09Something to consider is someone
  • 18:11who is Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry,
  • 18:13one in 40 individuals of Ashkenazi
  • 18:16Jewish ancestry will have a
  • 18:18BRCA one and BRCA 2 mutation.
  • 18:20There are three founder mutations
  • 18:23that are seen very commonly
  • 18:25in the Ashkenazi population.
  • 18:2895% of Ashkenazi Jewish
  • 18:29individuals who have a BRCA 1.
  • 18:32Or BRCA 2 mutation will have
  • 18:34one of these three mutations.
  • 18:36So it is more common in the
  • 18:39Ashkenazi population while in the
  • 18:40non Ashkenazy population the risk
  • 18:42of a BRCA mutations about one in
  • 18:45400 so is significantly increased.
  • 18:47What I will say is that without a
  • 18:50family history of breast cancer,
  • 18:52ovarian, prostate cancer,
  • 18:54pancreatic cancer,
  • 18:55the likelihood someone would have
  • 18:57a mutation is still relatively
  • 18:59low and at this point in time
  • 19:00there is no recommendations.
  • 19:02For general screening of the Ashkenazi
  • 19:05Jewish population without a family history,
  • 19:08so it is something I think worth
  • 19:10to consider for a referral,
  • 19:12because at least then we can talk about
  • 19:14with the patient and we can go through,
  • 19:16go through the family history.
  • 19:17But I do want to make that caviar.
  • 19:21Kind of similar to the before slide,
  • 19:22if someone has at least three breast
  • 19:25cancers in the family and their,
  • 19:28you know in their mother and their
  • 19:29aunt and a cousin again clustered
  • 19:31on the same side of the family,
  • 19:32that was worth the referral.
  • 19:35Someone who has a close relative
  • 19:37with breast cancer diagnosed at 45
  • 19:40or younger is worth a referral.
  • 19:41And someone who has a relative
  • 19:44with ovarian cancer.
  • 19:45Someone if someone reports out there on
  • 19:48how to ovarian cancer that individual
  • 19:50does meet criteria based on family history.
  • 19:53Same thing with male breast cancer.
  • 19:55Having an uncle or father with male
  • 19:58breast cancer is a referral is indicated.
  • 20:01Pancreatic cancer in a close relative,
  • 20:04particularly if specifically
  • 20:06if it's apparent.
  • 20:07For a child or a sibling that is
  • 20:09worth a referral and same thing
  • 20:12with metastatic prostate cancer.
  • 20:14This in a close male relative.
  • 20:17And finally, as before.
  • 20:20Leave any close relatives with a
  • 20:21combination of the above cancer types.
  • 20:23Again, if you're seeing in the same family,
  • 20:26prostate, ovarian, breast,
  • 20:27pancreatic, any combination of that,
  • 20:30that is definitely worth a referral.
  • 20:32'cause cancers all can be associated
  • 20:34through a single gene mutation.
  • 20:37Now switching gears and going
  • 20:38to her age right colon cancer.
  • 20:40Kind of like with hereditary breast cancer.
  • 20:42We cannot talk about her age rate colon
  • 20:45cancer without talking about Lynch syndrome.
  • 20:47Lynch syndrome is caused by germline
  • 20:49mutations in one of the five,
  • 20:51so we one of the four mismatch repair
  • 20:54proteins or deletions in the Epcam gene.
  • 20:57The risk is very dependent upon the gene,
  • 21:00especially in the last few years.
  • 21:02We've actually realized that the lifetime
  • 21:04risks with specifically with mutations.
  • 21:07And TM,
  • 21:07S2 and MSH six are quite different
  • 21:10than the risks associated with them.
  • 21:12Which one and MSH.
  • 21:132 and that could actually be
  • 21:15a whole whole talking in of itself.
  • 21:17So I'm not going to go into all the
  • 21:19details of how they're different,
  • 21:21but essentially the main cancer risks
  • 21:24with Lynch syndrome is colorectal cancer
  • 21:28and uterine or endometrial cancer.
  • 21:30As you can see in this chart,
  • 21:32which is mainly based on the high,
  • 21:34I would say the more high
  • 21:36penetrance genes Emily Quan and H.
  • 21:38Two, but there are risk of
  • 21:40other types of cancers,
  • 21:41including other GI cancers like
  • 21:43cancer of the stomach file,
  • 21:45duct cancer of the pancreas.
  • 21:48You can also see ovarian cancer
  • 21:49and women who have Lynch syndrome
  • 21:52and cancer of the urinary tract,
  • 21:54like the bladder and also individuals
  • 21:56with Lynch syndrome can have sebaceous
  • 21:58adenomas which are very specific
  • 22:00types of skin of skin findings.
  • 22:05So when we think about hereditary
  • 22:07colon cancer, I often think about in
  • 22:09these two buckets where one bucket is
  • 22:12what we call nonpolyposis syndromes,
  • 22:14which essentially is mainly Lynch syndrome,
  • 22:17maybe other hereditary
  • 22:18colon cancer syndromes.
  • 22:20This just means that someone is at a
  • 22:23high risk genetically of colon cancer,
  • 22:26but it's not necessarily because they're
  • 22:29developing a large number of polyps.
  • 22:32The polyps and Lynch syndrome
  • 22:33are not numerous like with.
  • 22:35Polly process,
  • 22:36but the polyps in Lynch syndrome
  • 22:38do advance much faster than non
  • 22:41lynch syndrome associated polyps.
  • 22:43So nonpolyposis syndromes you would
  • 22:45see a high risk of colon cancer but
  • 22:48not the high risk of numerous polyps.
  • 22:51Poly Post syndromes are different
  • 22:54because an individual would be
  • 22:56genetically predisposed to developing
  • 22:58large number of column of colon.
  • 23:01Polyps depend.
  • 23:02The type is dependent on the the
  • 23:04polyposis syndrome and I will.
  • 23:06Review those briefly on the next slide,
  • 23:08but typically they polyps tend
  • 23:10to be numerous, usually over 10,
  • 23:13and that numerous those numerous
  • 23:15polyps or what's causing the
  • 23:17increased risk of colon cancer.
  • 23:21So hurry, Polly pulses syndrome.
  • 23:23Most people have heard about familial
  • 23:26adenomatous polyp ossis or FAP
  • 23:28which is characterized by someone
  • 23:30developing in the classic form,
  • 23:32developing hundreds,
  • 23:34possibly up to 1000 adenomatous colon
  • 23:37polyps beginning at a very young age,
  • 23:40usually in the 20s and 20s.
  • 23:42Eat or even younger and for
  • 23:45the majority of individuals.
  • 23:47If this was left untreated,
  • 23:49it's with with a total colectomy.
  • 23:52There would, uh,
  • 23:53the risk of colon cancer
  • 23:54approaches 100% even by age 40,
  • 23:57so this is a significant
  • 23:59Poly pulses syndrome,
  • 24:00attenuated as as the name implies,
  • 24:03is attenuated,
  • 24:03meaning that the polyps develop
  • 24:05at a later age and there can
  • 24:07be a smaller number of polyps,
  • 24:09such usually over usually over 12
  • 24:12/ 20 up to 100 adenomatous polyps,
  • 24:16usually beginning in the 30s or 40s
  • 24:19fifties and we have seen a variety of.
  • 24:22Even very attenuated forms
  • 24:24even in our own clinic.
  • 24:26So there does appear to be some
  • 24:28variability we're discovering map can
  • 24:31sometimes mimic attenuated faps UM,
  • 24:34but the only difference with that is
  • 24:36that the all the cancer syndromes I've
  • 24:39talked about or autosomal dominant,
  • 24:41meaning someone would need to inherit a
  • 24:44single pathogenic variant in one copy
  • 24:46of the gene map is autosomal recessive.
  • 24:49So for someone to have map,
  • 24:51they would need their parents,
  • 24:52we need to be carriers.
  • 24:54In math,
  • 24:54is can present in a similar way too,
  • 24:57attenuated faps with again over,
  • 25:00usually over a dozen polyps up to
  • 25:03100 polyps beginning in someones 40s
  • 25:05or or 50s Paula Mac and sometimes
  • 25:08present with a more mixed Poly
  • 25:10poesis type where there's adenomas
  • 25:13but also non adenomatous polyps
  • 25:15like hyperplastic polyps and others.
  • 25:17Play Seeger syndrome is a is
  • 25:20A is a rare syndrome.
  • 25:23It presents particularly with
  • 25:24Poly pulses of the small bowel.
  • 25:27You could also see it in the colon,
  • 25:29but the small bowel is the
  • 25:30part that's mostly affected.
  • 25:32They develop specific pretty agurs polyps.
  • 25:34There's other features such as
  • 25:37Miko cutaneous pigmentation
  • 25:38that's present in childhood around
  • 25:40the lips on the fingertips,
  • 25:42even on the nostrils,
  • 25:44and there isn't also associated risk
  • 25:46of breast cancer and pancreatic cancer.
  • 25:49Juvenile polyp Ossis syndrome is
  • 25:51not related to the age of onset of
  • 25:55polyps because is not necessarily mean.
  • 25:58Someone develops polyps as
  • 25:59a juvenile or a child,
  • 26:01but the these individuals develop
  • 26:03specific types of juvenile polyps
  • 26:06and juvenile polyps are not.
  • 26:08They're not common types of polyps to have,
  • 26:10so someone who presents with multiple
  • 26:14juvenile polyps would warrant
  • 26:16investigation or juvenile polipo SIS.
  • 26:19And then there's other more newly
  • 26:21described Poly closest Jeanswear.
  • 26:23The risk there does appear to
  • 26:24be some risk of of Poly poesis,
  • 26:26but how that presents exactly is less clear.
  • 26:32So since there are those,
  • 26:33those two buckets,
  • 26:34so let's talk about some of the the
  • 26:36guidelines for the referral guidelines
  • 26:38for her age right colon cancer.
  • 26:40So Lynch syndrome and the guidelines
  • 26:43on NCCN are a little bit more clear
  • 26:47in terms of when to when to refer.
  • 26:51I'm not going to go through all of
  • 26:53this because I know it's a lot and
  • 26:55I'm gonna again distill it down.
  • 26:56But essentially it is based in a similar
  • 26:59way to BRC wanted to based on the age of
  • 27:04diagnosis and the number of people affected.
  • 27:07Poly post syndromes.
  • 27:08The testing strategy can be as you can see,
  • 27:11branched off a lot so as to
  • 27:13focus on this part here.
  • 27:15Probably most important thing to
  • 27:17think about is the number of polyps.
  • 27:20It says here over 10 helps me.
  • 27:23Over 20 adenomas.
  • 27:24We sometimes are more conservative
  • 27:27and if we see more than 10 adenomas,
  • 27:30it's it's worth a referral just
  • 27:32to look at the family history.
  • 27:35If someone has exactly 10, you know,
  • 27:38depending on their their age,
  • 27:40how many colonoscopies they've had.
  • 27:42Again, adenomas are common,
  • 27:44especially if people get older.
  • 27:45So having a few or a couple adenomas is
  • 27:48not does not mean someone has Polly Pocest.
  • 27:51But something to think about.
  • 27:53Also, as someone's age.
  • 27:54Also,
  • 27:54the size of the polop a young person
  • 27:57with a very large adenomas polyp,
  • 28:00even with a single a single polyp,
  • 28:02may still be worth worth the referral.
  • 28:06But these are these are suggestions,
  • 28:08so anyone with a colon or uterine
  • 28:11and demetral cancer diagnosis
  • 28:12under the age of 50 that would be
  • 28:15specifically suspicious of Lynch
  • 28:16syndrome because we expect to see
  • 28:18those cancers at younger ages.
  • 28:21Any Lynch syndrome associated cancer,
  • 28:23that is microsatellite instable
  • 28:26or has abnormal MMR staining
  • 28:28by immunohistochemistry.
  • 28:29So during it once now here at at a young
  • 28:34and haven and offered other other places,
  • 28:37they're now doing universal screening
  • 28:40of colon and endometrial tumors,
  • 28:44which is done through immunohistochemistry.
  • 28:46So staining of of the tumor to look for
  • 28:49the presence or absence of MMR proteins.
  • 28:53For individuals who have Lynch syndrome,
  • 28:55if we would expect that those MMR
  • 28:58proteins would actually be absent
  • 29:01on IHC staining and if those
  • 29:03MMR proteins are absent,
  • 29:05it actually results in
  • 29:07microsatellite instability.
  • 29:08So this is something that is
  • 29:10on is on pathology.
  • 29:11It would comment if there was loss
  • 29:13or presence of these proteins if
  • 29:16there was microsatellite instability.
  • 29:18And so the presence of MMR proteins
  • 29:21would actually be reassuring.
  • 29:23And it actually would reduce
  • 29:24the risk of Lynch syndrome,
  • 29:25but that's why any cancer with
  • 29:29abnormal IHC missing MMR proteins,
  • 29:32regardless of age, is is warrants a referral.
  • 29:36As I mentioned before,
  • 29:38multiple or you know over over 10
  • 29:41or early onset gastro GI polyps,
  • 29:44particularly in the in the colon,
  • 29:46but also again I mentioned
  • 29:48with puts Jaeger syndrome.
  • 29:50If there is or there are polyps of the
  • 29:53small bowel that can also warrant a referral.
  • 29:58And specifically,
  • 29:59I would say over 10 adenoma
  • 30:01dis or mixed Histology polyps.
  • 30:04Meaning if someone had a mix of adenomas
  • 30:07or other polyps like hyperplastic polyps
  • 30:10that weren't warrant or referral.
  • 30:13With since Hammertoe medicine juvenile
  • 30:15polyps are more rare polyp types,
  • 30:18if we if we see there's essentially
  • 30:20a lower threshold
  • 30:21for the number of those polyps.
  • 30:23So seeing at least five of those polyps
  • 30:25could warrant a referral and ***** aggers
  • 30:28polyps are a particular type of colon,
  • 30:30polyp or small bowel polyp,
  • 30:33so if that is confirmed on pathology,
  • 30:35at least two it definitely
  • 30:38is warrants or referral.
  • 30:40I'm adding this here for
  • 30:41diffuse gastric cancer.
  • 30:42It's not necessarily related to her edge,
  • 30:44right colon cancer,
  • 30:46but diffuse gastric cancer is
  • 30:48a rare type of gastric cancer,
  • 30:51and it actually can be related.
  • 30:53It is related to win this
  • 30:55hereditary related also to lobular
  • 30:57risk of lobular breast cancer.
  • 31:00So diffuse gastric cancer again is rare.
  • 31:03A specific pathology,
  • 31:05but definitely diagnosis under
  • 31:0750 would warrant or referral.
  • 31:10And similar to BRCA one and two,
  • 31:12if there's three cases of the same cancer
  • 31:16like 3 colon cancers or colon uterine colon,
  • 31:20stomach,
  • 31:20bladder, stomach,
  • 31:21colon all in close relatives
  • 31:24and multiple generations.
  • 31:26You know looking for those associated
  • 31:28cancers that would warrant a referral.
  • 31:31And similar for another for BRCA one and
  • 31:34two multiple cancers in one individual,
  • 31:37such as someone who's had two
  • 31:39colon cancers or someone who's
  • 31:42had colon and any material cancer.
  • 31:44For his patients with with just
  • 31:46a family history of cancer.
  • 31:48Again, as I mentioned before,
  • 31:50someone with at least three colon
  • 31:52cancers or Lynch syndrome associated
  • 31:54cancers in first and second degree
  • 31:57relatives so close relatives.
  • 31:59At least one first of your relative
  • 32:01with colon or endometrial cancer
  • 32:02under the age of 50.
  • 32:04So if someone's parent had color,
  • 32:06sibling had colon cancer under
  • 32:0950 or uterine cancer under 50.
  • 32:12And for second or third of your
  • 32:13relatives with a combination
  • 32:14of the above cancer types,
  • 32:16again looking for those patterns of cancer.
  • 32:21So I'm I'm. I'm sure everyone here again
  • 32:24as I talked about with knows about BRCA
  • 32:26one and two Lynch syndrome Poly Pulsus.
  • 32:29I want to talk about a few of more
  • 32:31rare indications that you may not come
  • 32:33across but just something I wanted
  • 32:36to bring up as a rare indication.
  • 32:38So hereditary paraganglioma and
  • 32:40Pheochromocytoma syndrome is is very
  • 32:43rare and as as the name implies,
  • 32:47individuals or increased risk
  • 32:49to develop rare tumor.
  • 32:52Here is called Paraganglioma
  • 32:54and pheochromocytomas,
  • 32:56so they develop from specific
  • 32:57nerve nerve cells.
  • 32:58The the chromaffin cells and
  • 33:00paragangliomas developed along the
  • 33:02Para vertebral axis from the base
  • 33:04of the skull to the pelvis so they
  • 33:06can show up in the head and neck.
  • 33:08They can show up in the abdomen.
  • 33:10Pheochromocytomas are a specific
  • 33:12type of paraganglioma that is
  • 33:15confined to the adrenal medula.
  • 33:18Both of these tumors can
  • 33:20secrete calcaneus specifically.
  • 33:22Feos almost always secrete
  • 33:24these excess of hormones,
  • 33:27so someone who has a pheochromocytoma can
  • 33:29actually present with severe hypertension,
  • 33:32flushing, sweating,
  • 33:33heart palpitations.
  • 33:35The majority of these tumors are benign,
  • 33:39but they some of them can be malignant,
  • 33:42particularly for some of these
  • 33:46hereditary predispositions.
  • 33:47So it's something that that's
  • 33:49why if some you know a patient
  • 33:51presents with a sudden neck, neck,
  • 33:53mass or a mass mass in the abdomen,
  • 33:56or is complaining of episodes of sweating,
  • 34:00fatigue, anxiety, that makes me not fatigue,
  • 34:03anxiety, heart palpitations,
  • 34:04it's you know it might.
  • 34:07It's it's, it's something.
  • 34:08Something to think about, you know,
  • 34:10maybe a referral to endocrinology.
  • 34:12Not saying that everyone that presents
  • 34:13with that will have these tumors,
  • 34:15'cause they're very rare, but.
  • 34:17They are something that we do.
  • 34:20We do screen form.
  • 34:21We do see patients with these tumors
  • 34:23because there is also screening.
  • 34:25For individuals who have a
  • 34:27hereditary predisposition.
  • 34:30Another, more rare hereditary predisposition
  • 34:34is hereditary hyperparathyroidism,
  • 34:36and I think when people think of
  • 34:39hyperparathyroidism, they may not
  • 34:40initially think of hereditary cancer.
  • 34:42'cause hyperparathyroidism is not
  • 34:44a cancer diagnosis, of course,
  • 34:47is just an overactive parathyroid gland,
  • 34:50but hereditary hyperparathyroidism can
  • 34:53be related to other risks of humors,
  • 34:57so the most common form of
  • 34:59hereditary hyperparathyroidism.
  • 35:01Is multiple endocrine neoplasia type
  • 35:04one or M1 where the individuals with
  • 35:07this with me and one will develop
  • 35:11hyperparathyroidism over 90% of
  • 35:13the time by the time they are 50,
  • 35:16usually when they're in their 20s or 30s
  • 35:18and they are at risk of other endocrine
  • 35:21tumors of of the endocrine system,
  • 35:24such as neuroendocrine tumors of the
  • 35:26pancreas of the stomach of carcinoid.
  • 35:29So it is important.
  • 35:31When someone has particularly early onset
  • 35:34hyperparathyroidism to actually evaluate,
  • 35:37to evaluate if they have possibly
  • 35:40have me in one and possibly some of
  • 35:43these less common forms of fresh
  • 35:46or hyperparathyroidism because it
  • 35:48possibly could mean they might be
  • 35:51at risk of other endocrine tumors.
  • 35:53So those are just two examples,
  • 35:55but just some of the other
  • 35:57indications that you know maybe may
  • 35:58not immediately come to mind when
  • 36:00we think about hereditary cancer.
  • 36:02Some of the more rare indications anyone
  • 36:06with with medullary thyroid cancer,
  • 36:08adrenocortical carcinoma,
  • 36:09paraganglioma, pheochromocytoma,
  • 36:11or red no blastoma at any age warrants
  • 36:16a referral or anyone that has a close
  • 36:19relative with any of these cancers.
  • 36:22Anyone with any again rare or
  • 36:24unusual tumors or physical findings
  • 36:26so there are specific skin findings
  • 36:29that even if they're benign,
  • 36:31they actually can be indicative
  • 36:33of a hereditary cancer syndrome,
  • 36:35such as sebaceous carcinoma or
  • 36:37sebaceous adenomas which we can see
  • 36:39with Lynch syndrome or tricholoma
  • 36:41which we can see with Cowden syndrome,
  • 36:44which is related to the.
  • 36:46The P10 gene. Melanoma is is common.
  • 36:51The biggest risk factor for
  • 36:53Melanoma or any skin cancer is of
  • 36:55course fair skin and sun exposure.
  • 36:58But if someone's had multiple
  • 37:00melanomas usually over over 3,
  • 37:03specially if they're at a younger age,
  • 37:05that would warrant a referral
  • 37:08to cancer genetics to rule out
  • 37:11a hereditary Melanoma syndrome.
  • 37:13Leukemia in children is unfortunately common,
  • 37:16but if there are other rare
  • 37:18childhood tumors that might,
  • 37:20that would be an indication for
  • 37:21a cancer genetics referral,
  • 37:23such as again, a Renault blastoma.
  • 37:27Sarcoma and osteosarcoma.
  • 37:28Some tumors that are diagnosed in
  • 37:32children can be indicative of a
  • 37:35rare hereditary cancer syndrome.
  • 37:38And anyone diagnosed with primary
  • 37:40hyperparathyroidism before the age
  • 37:42of 50 warrants a referral again,
  • 37:44since the most common type of
  • 37:48hyperparathyroidism, me and one.
  • 37:51I'm hypercalcemia,
  • 37:53which often is the first presenting sign
  • 37:55that someone has hyperparathyroidism
  • 37:57because elevated parathyroid hormone
  • 37:59causes an elevation of serum calcium.
  • 38:03The almost all people with me and
  • 38:05one will have hypercalcemia by
  • 38:07the time they're 50,
  • 38:08so if someone has hyperparathyroidism
  • 38:10before they're 50,
  • 38:11that could indicate that you
  • 38:14know it is important to rule
  • 38:17out another previous position.
  • 38:19And I say this for the end because it is
  • 38:21not a rare indication,
  • 38:22but anyone that has a fame
  • 38:24reports a family history,
  • 38:25but no mutation in any cancer gene
  • 38:30Jersey one MLH one pal B2 ATM.
  • 38:33Any cancer gene you know in a cousin,
  • 38:37even in a first cousin once removed,
  • 38:39if someone is reporting that that is
  • 38:42a definite indication for genetic
  • 38:44testing and it is very important if
  • 38:46a patient is reporting that to you.
  • 38:48That you do encourage them to get a
  • 38:50copy of their relatives test results,
  • 38:52because that can actually be really
  • 38:55helpful in their own testing and
  • 38:57actually ensuring their tests.
  • 38:59Their own testing is accurate.
  • 39:03So let's talk about out of pocket
  • 39:06genetic casting options and
  • 39:07direct to consumer testing.
  • 39:09So out of pocket genetic testing options.
  • 39:11Luckily in the last few years the
  • 39:13cost of genetic testing has gone down
  • 39:16significantly in the last several years,
  • 39:18so years, years and years ago,
  • 39:20over ten years ago,
  • 39:21testing may have been a few $1000
  • 39:24even just for BRCA one and two.
  • 39:26Testing now because the technology is faster,
  • 39:30it's better. It's cheaper now.
  • 39:33Genetic testing can be performed
  • 39:35through a large panel of genes.
  • 39:38Again, all the genes that we've talked about.
  • 39:40For an out of pocket costs of $250,
  • 39:42there are a few commercial
  • 39:44labs that are offering this,
  • 39:46which has been really excellent because
  • 39:48it doesn't prove access to genetic testing
  • 39:52for patients without insurance coverage.
  • 39:54For those patients who are
  • 39:56motivated to pursue genetic testing,
  • 39:58even if we don't seal are risk
  • 40:00factors in their family.
  • 40:01For a hereditary cancer syndrome
  • 40:04and just one example here in vitae,
  • 40:06they do actually have their own
  • 40:08self pay option.
  • 40:09Where to be $250 for diagnostic
  • 40:13testing and this testing is different
  • 40:17than the direct to consumer testing
  • 40:21like 23 and me or ancestry.com
  • 40:23which this test again detained
  • 40:25other other labs is testing is a
  • 40:29clinical diagnostic test but other
  • 40:31direct to consumer testing like 23
  • 40:33and me and ancestry.com is well how
  • 40:36I've heard it described.
  • 40:38It is like cocktail genetics.
  • 40:39It's it's something fun.
  • 40:41It's, you know, an ancestry.
  • 40:43There's nothing indicating that the
  • 40:45ancestry is actually is inaccurate.
  • 40:47If anything actually appears
  • 40:48to be quite quite accurate,
  • 40:50but it's not something that should
  • 40:53be used for clinical decision making.
  • 40:56So just something to.
  • 40:58To think about so.
  • 41:01As a as an example,
  • 41:04you know,
  • 41:04let's say Diana is a 36 year old female.
  • 41:07She's in good health.
  • 41:08She comes in for an annual exam.
  • 41:10She has Spanish ancestry.
  • 41:12She's reports her mom had breast
  • 41:15cancer 44 and passed away,
  • 41:17but no other family history of cancer.
  • 41:19And then Diana reports that she sent
  • 41:22in a sample for genetic testing at
  • 41:2423 and me and that her results were
  • 41:27negative for BRCA one and BRCA 2.
  • 41:29So the question I have and I was going to do.
  • 41:32Cool,
  • 41:33but it wasn't working out so
  • 41:35I'm just going to.
  • 41:37Close the question for
  • 41:38you to think about and you
  • 41:40can answer out loud where
  • 41:42you are or in your head.
  • 41:44Are Diane is genetic tests isn't informative.
  • 41:48And does she need to be retested
  • 41:50for BRCA one and BRCA 2 if
  • 41:52her testing is negative?
  • 41:53And let's say we actually have the report.
  • 41:55Is confirmed does she need to be retested?
  • 41:58Is this informative?
  • 42:02And the answer is no,
  • 42:06and and no so. So so 23andMe?
  • 42:10Uhm, it's not to say so.
  • 42:13Essentially what is important to
  • 42:15know is that 23 NI they do offer
  • 42:20testing for BRCA one and BRCA 2.
  • 42:23But only selected variants
  • 42:26you might remember.
  • 42:28I said that earlier in the earlier in
  • 42:31the talk I said that there are three
  • 42:33specific mutations that are seen commonly
  • 42:36in people that are Ashkenazi Jewish.
  • 42:38Those are the three variants that.
  • 42:41Are being tested for, so for Diana
  • 42:44she may not have those variants and.
  • 42:47A manned, but she also has Spanish ancestry,
  • 42:51so she would not have been expected
  • 42:53to have those variants at all,
  • 42:55and 23 me does not do full gene
  • 42:57sequencing of beers they wanted to.
  • 42:59Does not do deletion duplication,
  • 43:02and those three mutations are seen
  • 43:04almost exclusively in people or
  • 43:07Ashkenazi Jewish make up only three
  • 43:09of 1000 known pathogenic mutations.
  • 43:11So for Diana this is a very uninformative
  • 43:14test and she would be recommended to have.
  • 43:17Formal BRC wanted two testing gene
  • 43:21sequencing and deletion duplication.
  • 43:23And that's essentially what
  • 43:24direct to consumer testing does.
  • 43:26It looks at specific variants,
  • 43:28and some of these variants may have a
  • 43:30very small effect on health and may have
  • 43:33a very questionable effect on health,
  • 43:35and it's not.
  • 43:35It's not very clear some for
  • 43:37some of these variants,
  • 43:39for even other diseases,
  • 43:41how much risk is actually giving,
  • 43:44and if something is not clear exactly how
  • 43:46little of the gene that actually looking
  • 43:48at so direct to consumer testing is,
  • 43:50you know it is something that the the people.
  • 43:53Lou,
  • 43:54but it's something that should not be
  • 43:56used for any clinical determination.
  • 43:59What's what some people have been
  • 44:01doing is that they can take the raw
  • 44:03data from 23 and me and actually
  • 44:06upload it to programs like one called
  • 44:09promethease that actually builds a
  • 44:11personal DNA report by looking at the
  • 44:15genotype so they actually they actually
  • 44:18can do that at not a large cost,
  • 44:21but the problem with that is actually
  • 44:23uploading these raw data files.
  • 44:25There's actually a high false positive rate.
  • 44:29Because just in terms of of how the
  • 44:31data is uploaded and how the programs
  • 44:34are there is it can actually report
  • 44:36a pathogenic mutation that if we
  • 44:39look test the patient clinically
  • 44:41limitation is not there.
  • 44:44So this is so this is is 11
  • 44:48figure from from this test which
  • 44:51actually showed that out of.
  • 44:53Out of the the number of patients that
  • 44:55report that had pathogenic variant
  • 44:58detected by uploading the raw data,
  • 45:0140% were a false positive and you can
  • 45:03see most of those were in jeans that
  • 45:06we often know about PRC two BRCA,
  • 45:08one ATM MLH one related to Lynch syndrome.
  • 45:12Check two TB 53 so genes that if
  • 45:16someone had a mutation those genes
  • 45:19that has clinical significance so
  • 45:21individuals if they aren't aware of.
  • 45:24The risk of false positives.
  • 45:26They may be doing screening or
  • 45:29preventative surgeries that may
  • 45:30not be indicated so,
  • 45:32particularly with things like raw
  • 45:34data and direct to consumer testing.
  • 45:36If there is a family history
  • 45:37and a patient is concerned,
  • 45:39the best thing they can do is meet
  • 45:41with a genetic counselor and have a
  • 45:44clinical test for hereditary cancer.
  • 45:46And there are position statements
  • 45:48from the National Society of Genetic
  • 45:50Counselors about at home testing and
  • 45:53things to consider and the American
  • 45:55College of Obese and Gynecologists
  • 45:57also have a position statement.
  • 46:00Actually say quite nicely in their
  • 46:02title that it creates confusion,
  • 46:04so direct to consumer testing.
  • 46:06Again for ancestry.
  • 46:07For small things like that
  • 46:09is something that again,
  • 46:11cocktail genetic something that's fun.
  • 46:13But for things like BRCA one and
  • 46:15two testing or anything else,
  • 46:16it's clinically indicated.
  • 46:18Definitely a clinical diagnostic
  • 46:21test is warranted,
  • 46:22particularly if there's a family history.
  • 46:26So let's talk about,
  • 46:28you know genetic testing and
  • 46:29kind of what would we talk about
  • 46:32with with patients so.
  • 46:33When we do genetic testing,
  • 46:34there are three possible results we
  • 46:36can get from a task which will one
  • 46:39will stay positive means there is
  • 46:41a pathogenic mutation detected in
  • 46:43one of the genes analyzed and that
  • 46:46there are associated cancer risks.
  • 46:48Negative straightforward means
  • 46:49that when the genes are analyzed,
  • 46:52there's no known pathogenic mutations.
  • 46:54The jeans look normal,
  • 46:56there's no detectable hereditary cancer risk.
  • 46:58And then there's the variant
  • 47:01of uncertain significance,
  • 47:02which is a variation in a gene.
  • 47:05That the laboratory has not yet
  • 47:08classified to pathogenic meaning it's
  • 47:11causing cancer risk or benign variation,
  • 47:14meaning it's just a polymorphism
  • 47:17that's actually not impacting the gene.
  • 47:20And variants of uncertain significance.
  • 47:23They are very.
  • 47:24They're quite common,
  • 47:25especially when we do larger testing,
  • 47:28which we do nowadays.
  • 47:29We actually find variants of
  • 47:31uncertain significance.
  • 47:3220 to 30% of the time.
  • 47:34This is an example report,
  • 47:37and particularly it's always hard
  • 47:39when you get a variant of uncertain
  • 47:41significance in a gene like BRCA 2,
  • 47:44but most of these variants are
  • 47:47reclassified by the laboratory 2 benign.
  • 47:50Two normal changes.
  • 47:52That's why on the previous slide,
  • 47:55if a varying divine stern
  • 47:57significance is detected,
  • 47:58medical management is not
  • 48:00based on that variant.
  • 48:02It's based only on personal
  • 48:04family history factors.
  • 48:05We have seen cases where someone
  • 48:08is followed as if they have a
  • 48:11real mutation in BRCA 1, BRCA 2,
  • 48:14another gene that's actually a
  • 48:16variant of uncertain significance
  • 48:18and they're screened. They they may.
  • 48:21They may have preventive surgery and
  • 48:22then they find out in the future.
  • 48:24It is actually a benign variation so
  • 48:26we always go back to family history
  • 48:28to guide management is something
  • 48:30we kind of say innocent till proven
  • 48:32guilty because most of the time the
  • 48:35laboratory will update us with the
  • 48:37report when they can get enough
  • 48:39information to change their classification.
  • 48:41Uhm,
  • 48:42no,
  • 48:42and actually I already talked about this,
  • 48:44so I I've already.
  • 48:46I'm I'm when someone step ahead.
  • 48:48So really we also I want to mention
  • 48:51point out we don't test relatives for
  • 48:54variants of uncertain significance,
  • 48:56only if it might be helpful in
  • 48:59reclassifying that variant,
  • 49:01meaning that sometimes it can be
  • 49:02helpful to know did the variant come
  • 49:05from your momma from your dad because
  • 49:07your dad had pancreatic cancer and
  • 49:09your mom is 85 and still living so.
  • 49:12If the speakers say two variant
  • 49:13came from your mom,
  • 49:15I we might be less suspicious,
  • 49:16but it came from your dad that maybe
  • 49:19could maybe could add evidence or at
  • 49:21least keep it at the level that it is.
  • 49:23So that's why we only really test relatives.
  • 49:26If it might be helpful,
  • 49:27and reclassifying the the variant.
  • 49:30And and this this can be hard for patients.
  • 49:33It can be hard to have that uncertainty of.
  • 49:36Is this something I'm gonna
  • 49:38have to think about?
  • 49:39It is something that is actually going
  • 49:41to we find out that I'm as positive in
  • 49:43the future and it can be hard to how
  • 49:46to communicate this to family members.
  • 49:48It's you know,
  • 49:49it's something members can
  • 49:50won't understand it.
  • 49:51They might want to be tested for it.
  • 49:53So this can be particularly tricky in
  • 49:55communicating this with with patients,
  • 49:57which is why we do take time
  • 50:00before and after.
  • 50:01Even before someone has testing to
  • 50:02prep them and let them know this
  • 50:04isn't this as a possible result,
  • 50:06we can find that is quite common.
  • 50:10And testing options are, they're all.
  • 50:13They're all a little bit different.
  • 50:14We do single site testing.
  • 50:16If there's a known mutation in the family
  • 50:18and no other suspicious cancer history,
  • 50:21meaning that there's a mutation.
  • 50:24We've confirmed with their report,
  • 50:25there's nothing else.
  • 50:26In those cases we would test
  • 50:29for just that single mutation.
  • 50:31Other options for those families
  • 50:32where there's not a no mutation
  • 50:35is a cancer site specific panel
  • 50:37meaning related to genes.
  • 50:39Only.
  • 50:40Genes that are only related to
  • 50:41the cancer is seen in the family,
  • 50:43meaning that maybe if there's just
  • 50:45breast or varying cancer in the family,
  • 50:47limiting it to jeans that have a
  • 50:50known association with hereditary
  • 50:51breast or ovarian cancer.
  • 50:53Well, this colon cancer in the family,
  • 50:55keeping it only to hereditary colon cancer,
  • 50:58expanded panels.
  • 50:59We've been doing more often, meaning that.
  • 51:01You look at multiple genes related
  • 51:03to several types of cancer,
  • 51:05including cancers.
  • 51:06We may not even be seeing in
  • 51:08someone's family.
  • 51:09Such as colon cancer,
  • 51:11Melanoma, uterine cancer,
  • 51:12stomach cancer.
  • 51:13So essentially all the more common horizon
  • 51:16right cancer types we often can do that and
  • 51:19will be called an expanded panel testing.
  • 51:22But panel testing there are considerations
  • 51:24because the more genes we look at,
  • 51:26the higher chance we'll find something
  • 51:28in a hereditary cancer gene,
  • 51:30which could be expected
  • 51:32or possibly unexpected.
  • 51:33Some patients don't want to
  • 51:35find an unexpected result,
  • 51:37as I mentioned earlier,
  • 51:38there are some genes that are
  • 51:40included in testing nowadays,
  • 51:41particularly panel testing that
  • 51:43are have not been studied as long
  • 51:46they have an unknown cancer risk,
  • 51:48so there may not actually be
  • 51:51screening recommendations 'cause for
  • 51:52syndrome. Like Lynch syndrome
  • 51:54and mutations in BRCA,
  • 51:56one of your C2 there are very
  • 51:59clear screen recommendations
  • 52:00with some of these newer genes.
  • 52:02We can find a mutation and still just
  • 52:04follow someone based on personal or
  • 52:06family history until we learn about
  • 52:08what that gene is doing specifically.
  • 52:11And as I mentioned earlier that
  • 52:13when we do a larger panel probably
  • 52:16more standard panel that we do,
  • 52:17we find a VUS 20 to 30% of the
  • 52:21time so that's that's quite a.
  • 52:23A big chunk of the time we find at least one,
  • 52:26and so some patients may not want the
  • 52:29possibility of finding uncertain results,
  • 52:31so something else to also think
  • 52:33about when we offer genetic testing.
  • 52:35Some of the benefits of genetic testing,
  • 52:37you know it can end uncertainty.
  • 52:39You know if there is cancer in the family,
  • 52:41it can be helpful to know do is there
  • 52:43a reason for why there's cancer in
  • 52:45my family and do I have the reason
  • 52:47for the cancer in the family?
  • 52:49If I cancer risks for an individual,
  • 52:51so then we know what screening we can.
  • 52:53We need to be doing.
  • 52:54It can also clarify cancer risks for
  • 52:57relatives. If there is a positive result.
  • 52:59We then know that other relatives
  • 53:00would be at risk of inheriting
  • 53:02that same mutation and then they
  • 53:05can also have their own testing.
  • 53:07And it can aid in medical decision making.
  • 53:09Knowing again what screening
  • 53:11they should be doing.
  • 53:12Is it worth thinking about a
  • 53:14prophylactic bilateral mastectomy and
  • 53:16that can actually relieving anxiety?
  • 53:18There are studies showing that even
  • 53:20a positive result could actually
  • 53:22be anxiety relieving,
  • 53:23because some actually has the answer.
  • 53:26They actually know why there's cancer
  • 53:28in the family, what's causing it,
  • 53:30and they know the specific
  • 53:32risks instead of an unknown.
  • 53:34There are some risks and
  • 53:35limitations to genetic testing,
  • 53:37such as a negative result
  • 53:39may be uninformative,
  • 53:40or it may be falsely reassuring.
  • 53:43There are concerns about
  • 53:45genetic discrimination,
  • 53:46so there are laws in place that do
  • 53:48make it illegal for most health
  • 53:50insurance companies and most employers
  • 53:53from discriminating against someone
  • 53:54with a positive genetic test result,
  • 53:57but these do not apply to things
  • 54:00like life insurance,
  • 54:01long term care or disability and it actually.
  • 54:04Possibly could impact fitness
  • 54:06for duty in the military,
  • 54:08so it is something to think about
  • 54:10when someone has genetic testing.
  • 54:13You know what policies they have in place?
  • 54:15Are they actively serving in the
  • 54:17military just to just to think about?
  • 54:19In timing of testing,
  • 54:21might not be optimal depending
  • 54:22on someone's current.
  • 54:24Current lifestyle or current current
  • 54:26plans and Shank testing is an option.
  • 54:29Even though there are
  • 54:30clinical recommendations,
  • 54:31it is an option and for some
  • 54:33patients they actually prefer not
  • 54:34to know if they have hereditary
  • 54:36risk of cancer and they may not
  • 54:38wish to know future cancer risks.
  • 54:39There are limitations in the testing,
  • 54:42so it is possible even though are the
  • 54:45testing technology has grown a lot,
  • 54:47though there are sometimes undetectable
  • 54:50mutations and current technology that
  • 54:52could be missed in a known hereditary
  • 54:54cancer gene testing technology will
  • 54:56change and improve overtime just
  • 54:58like it has in the last ten years.
  • 55:00But that is a limitation and not all
  • 55:03inherited cancer syndromes are known.
  • 55:05So in the future kind of like I
  • 55:08mentioned with BRCA one and BRCA 2.
  • 55:10Four 2013 is out is outdated.
  • 55:14Is possible I could be saying
  • 55:16in you know 2030 if any test
  • 55:19after 20 before 2033 is outdated.
  • 55:21You know we are likely learn more about
  • 55:24inherited cancer syndromes and new genes.
  • 55:26So more testing may be needed in the future
  • 55:29to help clarify risk for some families.
  • 55:32And this is an example of.
  • 55:34Uninformative genetic testing,
  • 55:36where the probe and two were there.
  • 55:39The circle there is pointing to
  • 55:41she's had negative genetic testing,
  • 55:43but has a very striking family history,
  • 55:45so her testing is really not
  • 55:47informative and it's not someone
  • 55:49that you feel comfortable saying oh
  • 55:51you are at average risk for cancer.
  • 55:54We always go back to family history
  • 55:56to This is why we go back to family
  • 55:58history to guys screening until we
  • 56:00can get informative relative tested
  • 56:02and determine is is there a familial.
  • 56:05Mutation,
  • 56:06but maybe this probe and did not inherit.
  • 56:09Which is why, again,
  • 56:10it is very important for sometimes
  • 56:12testing the affected relative first,
  • 56:14and if that relative has had genetic
  • 56:16testing it is really important for
  • 56:18you to be talking to your patients
  • 56:20and explaining it is important to
  • 56:22get those medical records for us.
  • 56:26Engineer counseling in the session,
  • 56:27what would I do and will my colleagues do?
  • 56:30It's really a combination of education,
  • 56:33talking about the diagnosis
  • 56:35of hereditary cancers,
  • 56:36syndromes offering psychosocial support,
  • 56:39advocating for our patients,
  • 56:41talking about talking about risks.
  • 56:43So it is really this.
  • 56:45We're we're here for resource for,
  • 56:47for patients were also here
  • 56:49for resource for you.
  • 56:50You know,
  • 56:51in terms of in terms of risk
  • 56:54assessments and patients going forward.
  • 56:56The main I'll go through some of
  • 56:58this this briefly 'cause I don't
  • 57:00wanna go over too much overtime,
  • 57:02but there is a lot.
  • 57:05There's a lot in a genetic counseling
  • 57:08session where we go through medical history.
  • 57:11We take a detailed family history.
  • 57:13We talked about the risk factors.
  • 57:14We've seen, the family,
  • 57:15we do, a risk assessment.
  • 57:17We talk about specific genes or specific
  • 57:19syndromes the patient may be at risk for.
  • 57:22We talk about,
  • 57:23you know the what hereditary cancer is,
  • 57:26why we do testing.
  • 57:28What screening would change
  • 57:29if someone was positive?
  • 57:31You know why are we doing
  • 57:32this testing at all?
  • 57:33We talk about different testing
  • 57:35options in terms of limited
  • 57:37panels or expanded panels.
  • 57:39There's research.
  • 57:39Of course we coordinate the testing we
  • 57:42call the patients with their results,
  • 57:44explain their results,
  • 57:45and then of do any follow up in terms
  • 57:48of referrals to specialists and also
  • 57:50just be a resource for the patient.
  • 57:52Transfer information,
  • 57:53so for what you can do to help,
  • 57:56have your patients prepare
  • 57:57probably the most important thing
  • 57:59is to encourage their patients
  • 58:01to collect their family history.
  • 58:02So if you place a referral
  • 58:04for cancer genetics,
  • 58:05the most helpful thing is for
  • 58:07that patient to be talking to
  • 58:09relatives getting that information,
  • 58:11particularly if there's no mutation,
  • 58:13it's very important for to have
  • 58:15that confirmed with records.
  • 58:16It actually can be impact the accuracy
  • 58:19of the patient's own testing,
  • 58:20which some patients may not understand.
  • 58:23There can be differences in laboratories
  • 58:25and detecting specific variants,
  • 58:27so we cannot confirm what lab or
  • 58:30what specific variant or relative
  • 58:31had it's possible the patient
  • 58:33could get an uninformative or
  • 58:35even a false negative result,
  • 58:37so anything any medical
  • 58:39records from relatives,
  • 58:40any information is very helpful.
  • 58:45Which I just you know,
  • 58:46bring those milk records visit to the visits.
  • 58:49And. And again, encourage them to get
  • 58:53copies of any any genetic test results.
  • 58:57So after the referral, it takes about,
  • 59:00UM, the initial jet counseling visit is
  • 59:0360 minutes. They are sent a questionnaire.
  • 59:06And the patient schedules an appointment.
  • 59:08They do a very brief intake.
  • 59:10Again, the initial genetic counseling
  • 59:12visit takes about 60 minutes.
  • 59:14We again go through that that whole
  • 59:16session and the cases are reviewed.
  • 59:18Our weekly cancer genetics and prevention
  • 59:21program the just out of a meeting where
  • 59:24we review all the cases altogether.
  • 59:27Patients are disclosed.
  • 59:28The results over the phone or in person.
  • 59:30If the patient prefers and the
  • 59:32patient does get a copy of their
  • 59:35results and a detailed summary letter.
  • 59:37So I guess I'll just end this by saying,
  • 59:40uhm, you don't have to be the
  • 59:43experts on her Ezra Cancer.
  • 59:45We care for a resource for you.
  • 59:47You're really, you know,
  • 59:47the the front,
  • 59:48the front line for these patients to really
  • 59:50gauge their personal and family history.
  • 59:52So I really just less last thing I'll say,
  • 59:56and I think everyone for your attention
  • 59:59and is a pleasure talking everyone.
  • 01:00:01And I will take any questions.
  • 01:00:07Hi Amy, thanks for a great
  • 01:00:09talk that was really you.
  • 01:00:11You managed to pack in a lot there so
  • 01:00:14thank you so much I do just want to
  • 01:00:16let all of the attendees know that the
  • 01:00:19session is being recorded and a link to
  • 01:00:21the recording will be on our website.
  • 01:00:24So if you wanna go back and listen
  • 01:00:26to parts of Amy's talk you will
  • 01:00:28have access to that in the future.
  • 01:00:30We also have a number of resources on
  • 01:00:33our website including fact sheets that
  • 01:00:35you and your patients may find helpful so.
  • 01:00:37And encourage everyone to
  • 01:00:39look at their website.
  • 01:00:40And I believe that, UM,
  • 01:00:42the website will be included and
  • 01:00:45post conference communications soum.
  • 01:00:47We'd like to encourage people to enter
  • 01:00:51some questions for Amy in the Q&A and Amy,
  • 01:00:54we do have a couple here,
  • 01:00:56and so the first one,
  • 01:00:58the first question we have,
  • 01:01:00is whether Gardner's syndrome
  • 01:01:02is something separate or whether
  • 01:01:05that actually is attenuated.
  • 01:01:08Uhm Polly process.
  • 01:01:10Great, great question.
  • 01:01:12So Gardner syndrome is I would
  • 01:01:14say it's an outdated syndrome.
  • 01:01:17It was mainly used to describe
  • 01:01:20if someone had specific.
  • 01:01:23Less common features that we
  • 01:01:26would see with classic faps,
  • 01:01:28but we know now that people
  • 01:01:30with Gardner syndrome do have
  • 01:01:32pathogenic mutations in a PC,
  • 01:01:35so we really just prefer to
  • 01:01:38call it faps or attenuated faps.
  • 01:01:41So it's not so I would say
  • 01:01:43the answer to your question.
  • 01:01:45They they are the same.
  • 01:01:47They just said Gardner syndrome was house,
  • 01:01:50certain phenotypes were were described,
  • 01:01:53particularly some of the less
  • 01:01:55common features of of faps like
  • 01:01:58extra teeth and things like
  • 01:02:00that oftentimes was described
  • 01:02:02with the four Gardner syndrome,
  • 01:02:04but nowadays it is packaged together.
  • 01:02:07But that is an important point
  • 01:02:09that some people still use some
  • 01:02:11of the older terminology.
  • 01:02:12For Gardner syndrome.
  • 01:02:13So if someone does report a family
  • 01:02:16history of Gardner syndrome,
  • 01:02:17even though that's may not be
  • 01:02:19a term we use currently,
  • 01:02:20that would also warrant a referral.
  • 01:02:26And the next question we
  • 01:02:28have is an interesting one.
  • 01:02:30There's an attendee who's wondering
  • 01:02:32if we think the ages at the time
  • 01:02:36of diagnosis are getting younger
  • 01:02:38in subsequent generations.
  • 01:02:40So, for example,
  • 01:02:41if someone's mother had breast
  • 01:02:43cancer at 55 with a BRCA mutation,
  • 01:02:47are we seeing her daughter
  • 01:02:49who has a mutation having her
  • 01:02:51breast cancer earlier in life?
  • 01:02:54That is, that's a great question.
  • 01:02:58As with with BRCA one and BRCA 2 this
  • 01:03:02and we we often call this in genetics
  • 01:03:06anticipation where the phenotype appears
  • 01:03:08to present at a younger and younger age.
  • 01:03:13There's no known evidence of
  • 01:03:16anticipation in BRCA one and BRCA 2.
  • 01:03:20It's it's it's. It's hard to say,
  • 01:03:22but there can be what we
  • 01:03:24call variable expressivity,
  • 01:03:25meaning that someone could have
  • 01:03:27the same mutation and beers
  • 01:03:28they want to be receipt to,
  • 01:03:30but they will not always develop
  • 01:03:32breast cancer at the same
  • 01:03:34age or even develop breast.
  • 01:03:36You know someone made available
  • 01:03:37varying cancer or or breast cancer,
  • 01:03:39which we call variable expressivity.
  • 01:03:41So that might explain why in some
  • 01:03:43families it does appear that Amma,
  • 01:03:45a mother may have breast cancer at a later
  • 01:03:48age and her daughter has breast cancer and.
  • 01:03:50Earlier age,
  • 01:03:51not because of something like anticipation,
  • 01:03:54but possibly do that variable expressivity.
  • 01:03:57Although I do,
  • 01:03:58I do know that there was some older data.
  • 01:04:00I think Claire you mentioned this
  • 01:04:02to me a few years ago where there
  • 01:04:05is some data suggesting maybe
  • 01:04:06anticipation with Lee from Mini
  • 01:04:08syndrome where individuals actually
  • 01:04:10appear to develop Lee from many
  • 01:04:12syndrome associated cancers,
  • 01:04:14particularly breast cancer at younger
  • 01:04:17age and subsequent generations I.
  • 01:04:20In terms of additional research on that,
  • 01:04:22I have not seen anything recent about that,
  • 01:04:25but I know there was some hypothesis
  • 01:04:28that leaf armenie syndrome may
  • 01:04:30have some level of anticipation.
  • 01:04:32But in terms of other hereditary
  • 01:04:34breast cancer syndromes,
  • 01:04:34there's none that we know of yet.
  • 01:04:40Yeah, and I would just add that even
  • 01:04:42with these hereditary cancer syndromes,
  • 01:04:44the mutation is not the only
  • 01:04:46contributing factor to cancer risk.
  • 01:04:48Lifestyle environment.
  • 01:04:49All of those things still play
  • 01:04:51a role in cancer development,
  • 01:04:54and so it's possible that some
  • 01:04:56of those earlier cancer diagnosis
  • 01:04:58that you're you're mentioning
  • 01:04:59are related to other factors
  • 01:05:02outside of the genetic mutation,
  • 01:05:04or in addition to the genetic mutation.
  • 01:05:07And I think we still have a
  • 01:05:09lot to learn about hereditary.
  • 01:05:10Cancer genetics we've come a long way.
  • 01:05:12We know a lot and they will learn
  • 01:05:14more and perhaps some of these
  • 01:05:16hereditary cancer syndromes do,
  • 01:05:18in fact have anticipation.
  • 01:05:19And we just don't know yet.
  • 01:05:25Those are all the questions
  • 01:05:26that were entered into the Q&A,
  • 01:05:28so I don't know if any of our
  • 01:05:30panelists have any questions or if
  • 01:05:32we want to give people just a minute
  • 01:05:35in case any other questions come up.
  • 01:05:40Maybe while waiting I'll post a
  • 01:05:42question Amy that was a great talk.
  • 01:05:45So quick question.
  • 01:05:46You just you went over very nicely
  • 01:05:48about what happened with Brad.
  • 01:05:50Can white people got retested
  • 01:05:52then and then towards the end?
  • 01:05:54You also discuss a little bit
  • 01:05:55more that there may be some.
  • 01:05:56Uh, in the future,
  • 01:05:59opportunities for bettering the
  • 01:06:00testing and actually being able to
  • 01:06:02detect a few more number 4 so when
  • 01:06:05do you think people will will have
  • 01:06:07to consider re sending the patient?
  • 01:06:10Who previously had tested negative.
  • 01:06:12I'm talking in general terms.
  • 01:06:13What do you think would be a general
  • 01:06:16recommendation that we could follow
  • 01:06:18in terms of in terms of that?
  • 01:06:20That's a, that's a.
  • 01:06:22That's a great question,
  • 01:06:23and it's something that patients also ask me.
  • 01:06:25Even now they they say, well,
  • 01:06:27when should I call you?
  • 01:06:28You know, for more testing, I think it's.
  • 01:06:31It's hard now that testing has gone so
  • 01:06:34comprehensive, I would say so quickly.
  • 01:06:37Even the last five years.
  • 01:06:38What I've been saying.
  • 01:06:39What I was saying to patients,
  • 01:06:41and this is,
  • 01:06:42but again,
  • 01:06:43this is not something that's
  • 01:06:44really hard and fast rule.
  • 01:06:46I would say at least five
  • 01:06:48years to check back,
  • 01:06:50unless there was a change in someone's
  • 01:06:53family history like a new cancer diagnosis,
  • 01:06:55that possibly could mean that other
  • 01:06:57genes related to that diagnosis
  • 01:06:59were not included in the testing.
  • 01:07:01But if there's no changes.
  • 01:07:03Someone's personal or family history.
  • 01:07:05I would say every five years
  • 01:07:08is a good place to check,
  • 01:07:09and it's possible even in
  • 01:07:11five years from now.
  • 01:07:12Maybe it's it might not change as much,
  • 01:07:16but I can't imagine the testing jumping
  • 01:07:19to such a huge amount of clinical
  • 01:07:22significance in less than five years.
  • 01:07:25I don't know Clearview any other
  • 01:07:27thoughts on that in particular?
  • 01:07:30No, I agree. I mean,
  • 01:07:31I think the testing technology doesn't.
  • 01:07:33It changes quickly,
  • 01:07:34but not that quickly.
  • 01:07:36So five years is probably a good.
  • 01:07:39An estimate, but I would also just reiterate
  • 01:07:41one other thing that you said there.
  • 01:07:43If the personal or family history changes,
  • 01:07:46that's another really important
  • 01:07:47touch point for patients to
  • 01:07:49get back in contact with us,
  • 01:07:51because that could certainly change things,
  • 01:07:55so those are good time point
  • 01:07:57to consider re evaluation.
  • 01:08:02Right, I think that's it for question.
  • 01:08:05So Amy, thanks again for your talk
  • 01:08:07and we hope that everyone will
  • 01:08:09join us next week for the second
  • 01:08:12half of this seminar series.
  • 01:08:16Thank you everyone. Have a good night.