Publications by authors named "Katherine S Hunt"

9 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Clinical Implementation of Integrated Genomic Profiling in Patients with Advanced Cancers.

Sci Rep 2016 12 23;6(1):25. Epub 2016 Dec 23.

Division of Hematology/Oncology Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.

DNA focused panel sequencing has been rapidly adopted to assess therapeutic targets in advanced/refractory cancer. Integrated Genomic Profiling (IGP) utilising DNA/RNA with tumour/normal comparisons in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) compliant setting enables a single assay to provide: therapeutic target prioritisation, novel target discovery/application and comprehensive germline assessment. A prospective study in 35 advanced/refractory cancer patients was conducted using CLIA-compliant IGP. Feasibility was assessed by estimating time to results (TTR), prioritising/assigning putative therapeutic targets, assessing drug access, ascertaining germline alterations, and assessing patient preferences/perspectives on data use/reporting. Therapeutic targets were identified using biointelligence/pathway analyses and interpreted by a Genomic Tumour Board. Seventy-five percent of cases harboured 1-3 therapeutically targetable mutations/case (median 79 mutations of potential functional significance/case). Median time to CLIA-validated results was 116 days with CLIA-validation of targets achieved in 21/22 patients. IGP directed treatment was instituted in 13 patients utilising on/off label FDA approved drugs (n = 9), clinical trials (n = 3) and single patient IND (n = 1). Preliminary clinical efficacy was noted in five patients (two partial response, three stable disease). Although barriers to broader application exist, including the need for wider availability of therapies, IGP in a CLIA-framework is feasible and valuable in selection/prioritisation of anti-cancer therapeutic targets.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-016-0021-4DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5431338PMC
December 2016

Outcomes of Concurrent Breast and Gynecologic Risk Reduction Surgery.

Ann Surg Oncol 2017 Jan 31;24(1):77-83. Epub 2016 Aug 31.

Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, USA.

Background: Women considering risk reduction surgery after a diagnosis of breast/ovarian cancer and/or inherited cancer gene mutation face difficult decisions. The safety of combined breast and gynecologic surgery has not been well studied; therefore, we evaluated the outcomes for patients who have undergone coordinated multispecialty surgery.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing simultaneous breast and gynecologic surgery for newly or previously diagnosed breast cancer and/or an inherited cancer gene mutation during the same anesthetic at a single institution from 1999 to 2013.

Results: Seventy-three patients with a mean age of 50 years (range 27-88) were identified. Most patients had newly diagnosed breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (62 %) and 28 patients (38 %) had an identified BRCA mutation. Almost all gynecologic procedures were for risk reduction or benign gynecologic conditions (97 %). Mastectomy was performed in 39 patients (53 %), the majority of whom (79 %) underwent immediate reconstruction. The most common gynecologic procedure involved bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, which was performed alone in 18 patients (25 %) and combined with hysterectomy in 40 patients (55 %). A total of 32 patients (44 %) developed postoperative complications, most of which were minor and did not require surgical intervention or hospitalization. Two of the 19 patients who underwent implant reconstruction (11 %; 3 % of the entire cohort) had major infectious complications requiring explantation.

Conclusion: Combined breast and gynecologic procedures for a breast cancer diagnosis and/or risk reduction in patients can be accomplished with acceptable morbidity. Concurrent operations, including reconstruction, can be offered to patients without negatively impacting their outcome.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5479-6DOI Listing
January 2017

Whole-Exome Sequencing of 10 Scientists: Evaluation of the Process and Outcomes.

Mayo Clin Proc 2015 Oct;90(10):1327-37

Biomedical Ethics Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

Objective: To understand motivations, educational needs, and concerns of individuals contemplating whole-exome sequencing (WES) and determine what amount of genetic information might be obtained by sequencing a generally healthy cohort so as to more effectively counsel future patients.

Patients And Methods: From 2012 to 2014, 40 medically educated, generally healthy scientists at Mayo Clinic were invited to have WES conducted on a research basis; 26 agreed to be in a drawing from which 10 participants were selected. The study involved pre- and posttest genetic counseling and completion of 4 surveys related to the experience and outcomes. Whole-exome sequencing was conducted on DNA from blood from each person.

Results: Most variants (76,305 per person; range, 74,505-77,387) were known benign allelic variants, variants in genes of unknown function, or variants of uncertain significance in genes of known function. The results of suspected pathogenic/pathogenic variants in Mendelian disorders and pharmacogenomic variants were disclosed. The mean number of suspected pathogenic/pathogenic variants was 2.2 per person (range, 1-4). Four pharmacogenomic genes were included for reporting; variants were found in 9 of 10 participants.

Conclusion: This study provides data that may be useful in establishing reality-based patient expectations, outlines specific points to cover during counseling, and increases confidence in the feasibility of providing adequate preparation and counseling for WES in generally healthy individuals.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2015.05.021DOI Listing
October 2015

Whole-Exome Sequencing of 10 Scientists: Evaluation of the Process and Outcomes.

Mayo Clin Proc 2015 Oct;90(10):1327-37

Biomedical Ethics Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

Objective: To understand motivations, educational needs, and concerns of individuals contemplating whole-exome sequencing (WES) and determine what amount of genetic information might be obtained by sequencing a generally healthy cohort so as to more effectively counsel future patients.

Patients And Methods: From 2012 to 2014, 40 medically educated, generally healthy scientists at Mayo Clinic were invited to have WES conducted on a research basis; 26 agreed to be in a drawing from which 10 participants were selected. The study involved pre- and posttest genetic counseling and completion of 4 surveys related to the experience and outcomes. Whole-exome sequencing was conducted on DNA from blood from each person.

Results: Most variants (76,305 per person; range, 74,505-77,387) were known benign allelic variants, variants in genes of unknown function, or variants of uncertain significance in genes of known function. The results of suspected pathogenic/pathogenic variants in Mendelian disorders and pharmacogenomic variants were disclosed. The mean number of suspected pathogenic/pathogenic variants was 2.2 per person (range, 1-4). Four pharmacogenomic genes were included for reporting; variants were found in 9 of 10 participants.

Conclusion: This study provides data that may be useful in establishing reality-based patient expectations, outlines specific points to cover during counseling, and increases confidence in the feasibility of providing adequate preparation and counseling for WES in generally healthy individuals.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2015.05.021DOI Listing
October 2015

Public perceptions of presymptomatic testing for Alzheimer disease.

Mayo Clin Proc 2014 Oct 26;89(10):1389-96. Epub 2014 Aug 26.

Center for Biology and Society and School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe.

Objective: To explore the self-expressed desire for, envisioned reaction to, and basic understanding of presymptomatic Alzheimer disease (AD)-related genetic and biomarker tests.

Patients And Methods: The Alzheimer's Prevention Registry is an online community of people at least 18 years of age who are interested in AD prevention research for purely informational purposes or to be considered for possible research participation in future studies. Information about presymptomatic testing and an online multiple choice format survey were posted from November 1, 2012, through June 20, 2013, on the registry website.

Results: Of 4036 respondents, 80.8% (3195/3952) wanted genetic testing if paid by insurance and 58.7% (2261/3851) if it would cost them at least $100. A total of 80.2% (3112/3879) wanted biomarker testing. If at high risk for AD, 90.5% (3478/3841) endorsed that they would "pursue a healthier lifestyle," but 11.6% (427/3706) endorsed "seriously consider suicide." The implication of a positive genetic test result was incorrectly understood by 13.1% (500/3812) and 32.6% (1255/3848) failed to view a positive biomarker test result as evidence of increased risk for or the presence of AD.

Conclusion: Despite efforts to increase public awareness of AD, our survey results suggest that greater education of the public is needed. Interested patients should probably undergo psychological screening to identify those at high risk of adverse psychological outcomes, and disclosure of presymptomatic test results should be anchored to tangible constructive action plans, such as healthy lifestyle changes, long-term care planning, and, when available and appropriate, participation in research trials.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.05.016DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4369785PMC
October 2014

Screening for Muir-Torre syndrome using mismatch repair protein immunohistochemistry of sebaceous neoplasms.

J Genet Couns 2013 Jun 6;22(3):393-405. Epub 2012 Dec 6.

Mayo Clinic, Medical Genetics, 4500 San Pablo Road, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA.

Screening for the Muir-Torre variant of Lynch Syndrome (LS) using Mismatch Repair (MMR) gene immunohistochemistry (IHC) on sebaceous neoplasms (SNs) is technically feasible. To date, research into the clinical utility of MMR IHC for this indication is limited. We conducted a retrospective chart review of 90 patients with MMR IHC completed on at least one SN from January 2005 to May 2010. SNs included were adenomas, epitheliomas, carcinomas and basal and squamous cell carcinomas with sebaceous differentiation. Of the 90 patients, 13 (14 %) had genetically confirmed or fulfilled clinical criteria for a diagnosis of MTS and 51 patients (57 %) presented with an abnormal MMR IHC result (loss of one or more MMR proteins) on at least one SN. Abnormal IHC had a sensitivity of 85 %, specificity of 48 %, positive predictive value (PPV) of 22 % and negative predictive value (NPV) of 95 % when evaluating for MTS. When personal or family history of colorectal cancer (≥2 family members with a history of colorectal cancer) was taken into consideration, ignoring IHC results, sensitivity was 92 %, specificity was 99 %, PPV was 92 % and NPV was 99 %. MMR IHC on SNs when used to screen for MTS has poor diagnostic utility. We recommend that MMR IHC not be performed routinely on SNs when the patient does not have either personal or family history of colorectal cancer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10897-012-9552-4DOI Listing
June 2013

Essential elements of genetic cancer risk assessment, counseling, and testing: updated recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors.

J Genet Couns 2012 Apr 2;21(2):151-61. Epub 2011 Dec 2.

Southeast Nebraska Cancer Center, Lincoln, NE, USA.

Updated from their original publication in 2004, these cancer genetic counseling recommendations describe the medical, psychosocial, and ethical ramifications of counseling at-risk individuals through genetic cancer risk assessment with or without genetic testing. They were developed by members of the Practice Issues Subcommittee of the National Society of Genetic Counselors Familial Cancer Risk Counseling Special Interest Group. The information contained in this document is derived from extensive review of the current literature on cancer genetic risk assessment and counseling as well as the personal expertise of genetic counselors specializing in cancer genetics. The recommendations are intended to provide information about the process of genetic counseling and risk assessment for hereditary cancer disorders rather than specific information about individual syndromes. Essential components include the intake, cancer risk assessment, genetic testing for an inherited cancer syndrome, informed consent, disclosure of genetic test results, and psychosocial assessment. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care provider's professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a client.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10897-011-9462-xDOI Listing
April 2012

Developing a reproductive life plan.

J Midwifery Womens Health 2011 Sep-Oct;56(5):468-74. Epub 2011 Aug 11.

Division of Women’s Health Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 13400 E Shea Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA.

The purpose of this article is 2-fold: to emphasize the importance of a reproductive life plan and to define its key elements. We review the 2006 recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) regarding ways to improve the delivery of preconception health care to women in the United States, with particular focus on encouraging individual reproductive responsibility throughout the life span and on encouraging every woman to develop a reproductive life plan. We propose recommendations for the content of a reproductive life plan and explore ways to incorporate the guidelines from the CDC into clinical practice. By encouraging women to consider their plans for childbearing before they become pregnant, clinicians have the opportunity to influence behavior before pregnancy, which may decrease the incidence of unintended pregnancies and adverse pregnancy outcomes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1542-2011.2011.00048.xDOI Listing
March 2013