No abstract

No abstract

PURPOSE Evidence-based guidelines recommend cascade genetic counseling and testing for hereditary cancer syndromes, providing relatives the opportunity for early detection and prevention of cancer. The current standard is for patients to contact and encourage relatives (patient-mediated contact) to undergo counseling and testing. Direct relative contact by the medical team or testing laboratory has shown promise but is complicated by privacy laws and lack of infrastructure. We sought to compare outcomes associated with patient-mediated and direct relative contact for hereditary cancer cascade genetic counseling and testing in the first meta-analysis on this topic. MATERIALS AND METHODS We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PROSPERO No.: CRD42020134276). We searched key electronic databases to identify studies evaluating hereditary cancer cascade testing. Eligible trials were subjected to meta-analysis. RESULTS Eighty-seven studies met inclusion criteria. Among relatives included in the meta-analysis, 48% (95% CI, 38 to 58) underwent cascade genetic counseling and 41% (95% CI, 34 to 48) cascade genetic testing. Compared with the patient-mediated approach, direct relative contact resulted in significantly higher uptake of genetic counseling for all relatives (63% [95% CI, 49 to 75] v 35% [95% CI, 24 to 48]) and genetic testing for first-degree relatives (62% [95% CI, 49 to 73] v 40% [95% CI, 32 to 48]). Methods of direct contact included telephone calls, letters, and e-mails; respective rates of genetic testing completion were 61% (95% CI, 51 to 70), 48% (95% CI, 37 to 59), and 48% (95% CI, 45 to 50). CONCLUSION Most relatives at risk for hereditary cancer do not undergo cascade genetic counseling and testing, forgoing potentially life-saving medical interventions. Compared with patient-mediated contact, direct relative contact increased rates of cascade genetic counseling and testing, arguing for a shift in the care delivery paradigm, to be confirmed by randomized controlled trials.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Ovarian cancers are known to evade immunosurveillance and to orchestrate a suppressive immune microenvironment. Here we examine the role of human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), an ovarian cancer biomarker, in immune evasion. Through modified subtractive hybridization analyses we have characterized the gene targets of HE4 in human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs), and established a preliminary mechanism for HE4-mediated immune failure in ovarian tumours. Upon exposure of purified PMBCs to HE4, osteopontin (OPN) and dual-specificity phosphatase 6 (DUSP6) emerged as the most suppressed and up-regulated genes, respectively. SKOV3 and OVCAR8, human ovarian carcinoma cell lines, exhibited enhanced proliferation in conditioned media from HE4-exposed PBMCs, an effect that was attenuated by the addition of recombinant OPN or OPN-inducible cytokines [interleukin (IL)-12 and interferon (IFN)-Ɣ]. Additionally, upon co-culture with PBMCs, HE4-silenced SKOV3 cells were found to be more susceptible to cytotoxic cell death. The relationship between HE4 and OPN was reinforced further through the analysis of serous ovarian cancer patient samples. In these biopsy specimens, the number of OPN T cells correlated positively with progression free survival (PFS) and inversely with serum HE4 level. Taken together, these findings show that HE4 enhances ovarian cancer tumorigenesis by compromising OPN-mediated T cell activation.