Publications by authors named "Tracy Graham"

10 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

MLH1 epimutation is a rare mechanism for Lynch syndrome: A case report and review of the literature.

Genes Chromosomes Cancer 2021 May 2. Epub 2021 May 2.

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Sinai Health System and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Endometrial carcinoma is one of the prototypical malignancies associated with Lynch syndrome, an inherited cancer syndrome most commonly caused by germline mutations in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes, although rare alternative mechanisms also exist. In this report, we describe a patient first diagnosed with colorectal cancer at age 33, then vulvar squamous cell carcinoma, facial sebaceous adenoma/sebaceoma, and finally endometrial carcinoma at age 52. All tumors were MLH1/PMS2-deficient by immunohistochemistry, and MLH1 promoter methylation was identified in the endometrial cancer. Germline MLH1 testing was negative for pathogenic variants, but she was subsequently diagnosed with Lynch syndrome secondary to a germline monoallelic constitutional epimutation of the MLH1 promoter. Identification of patients displaying a Lynch syndrome phenotype but lacking germline MMR mutations is important to avoid delays in the diagnosis of Lynch syndrome as well as the initiation of appropriate cancer screening and genetic counseling.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gcc.22957DOI Listing
May 2021

Rapid Genetic Testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations at the Time of Breast Cancer Diagnosis: An Observational Study.

Ann Surg Oncol 2021 Apr 28;28(4):2219-2226. Epub 2020 Sep 28.

Women's College Research Institute, Toronto, Canada.

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of rapid genetic testing (RGT) for BRCA1 and BRCA2 at the time of breast cancer diagnosis on treatment choices. Bilateral mastectomy for the treatment of breast cancer in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation offers a reduction in the risk of contralateral breast cancer. It is unclear whether offering RGT at the time of breast cancer diagnosis has an impact on women's surgical decision-making.

Methods: Women with breast cancer diagnosed between June 2013 and May 2018 were recruited from four academic health sciences centers in Toronto, Canada. The participants completed a questionnaire before genetic testing, then one week and one year after disclosure of the genetic test result. Before surgery, RGT was performed. Diagnostic, pathologic, and treatment data were compared between those with and those without a BRCA mutation.

Results: The study enrolled 1007 women who consented to RGT. The mean age of the participants was 46.3 years, and the median time to result disclosure was 10 days. A BRCA mutation was found in 6% of the women. The women with a BRCA mutation were significantly more likely to elect for bilateral mastectomy than the women without a BRCA mutation (p < 0.0001). Of the BRCA-positive patients, 95.7% reported that they used their genetic test result to make a surgical decision.

Conclusions: The women provided with RGT at the time of breast cancer diagnosis use the genetic information to make treatment decisions, and the majority of those identified with a BRCA mutation elect for a bilateral mastectomy.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09160-8DOI Listing
April 2021

Effectiveness of the Genomics ADvISER decision aid for the selection of secondary findings from genomic sequencing: a randomized clinical trial.

Genet Med 2020 04 11;22(4):727-735. Epub 2019 Dec 11.

Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of the Genomics ADvISER (www.genomicsadviser.com) decision aid (DA) for selection of secondary findings (SF), compared with genetic counseling alone.

Methods: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted to evaluate whether the Genomics ADvISER is superior to genetic counseling when hypothetically selecting SF. Participants were randomized to use the DA followed by discussion with a genetic counselor, or to genetic counseling alone. Surveys were administered at baseline and post-intervention. Primary outcome was decisional conflict. Secondary outcomes were knowledge, preparation for, and satisfaction with decision-making, anxiety, and length of counseling session.

Results: Participants (n = 133) were predominantly White/European (74%), female (90%), and ≥50 years old (60%). Decisional conflict (mean difference 0.05; P = 0.60), preparation for decision-making (0.17; P = 0.95), satisfaction with decision (-2.18; P = 0.06), anxiety (0.72; P = 0.56), and knowledge of sequencing limitations (0.14; P = 0.70) did not significantly differ between groups. However, intervention participants had significantly higher knowledge of SF (0.39; P < 0.001) and sequencing benefits (0.97; P = 0.01), and significantly shorter counseling time (24.40 minutes less; P < 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: The Genomics ADvISER did not decrease decisional conflict but reduced counseling time and improved knowledge. This decision aid could serve as an educational tool, reducing in-clinic time and potentially health care costs.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41436-019-0702-zDOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7425118PMC
April 2020

Health outcomes, utility and costs of returning incidental results from genomic sequencing in a Canadian cancer population: protocol for a mixed-methods randomised controlled trial.

BMJ Open 2019 10 7;9(10):e031092. Epub 2019 Oct 7.

Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Introduction: Genomic sequencing has rapidly transitioned into clinical practice, improving diagnosis and treatment options for patients with hereditary disorders. However, large-scale implementation of genomic sequencing faces challenges, especially with regard to the return of incidental results, which refer to genetic variants uncovered during testing that are unrelated to the primary disease under investigation, but of potential clinical significance. High-quality evidence evaluating health outcomes and costs of receiving incidental results is critical for the adoption of genomic sequencing into clinical care and to understand the unintended consequences of adoption of genomic sequencing. We aim to evaluate the health outcomes and costs of receiving incidental results for patients undergoing genomic sequencing.

Methods And Analysis: We will compare health outcomes and costs of receiving, versus not receiving, incidental results for adult patients with cancer undergoing genomic sequencing in a mixed-methods randomised controlled trial. Two hundred and sixty patients who have previously undergone first or second-tier genetic testing for cancer and received uninformative results will be recruited from familial cancer clinics in Toronto, Ontario. Participants in both arms will receive cancer-related results. Participants in the intervention arm have the option to receive incidental results. Our primary outcome is psychological distress at 2 weeks following return of results. Secondary outcomes include behavioural consequences, clinical and personal utility assessed over the 12 months after results are returned and health service use and costs at 12 months and 5 years. A subset of participants and providers will complete qualitative interviews about utility of incidental results.

Ethics And Dissemination: This study has been approved by Clinical Trials Ontario Streamlined Research Ethics Review System that provides ethical review and oversight for multiple sites participating in the same clinical trial in Ontario.Results from the trial will be shared through stakeholder workshops, national and international conferences, and peer-reviewed journals.

Trial Registration Number: NCT03597165.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031092DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6797333PMC
October 2019

Development of patient "profiles" to tailor counseling for incidental genomic sequencing results.

Eur J Hum Genet 2019 07 8;27(7):1008-1017. Epub 2019 Mar 8.

University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Guidelines recommend that providers engage patients in shared decision-making about receiving incidental results (IR) prior to genomic sequencing (GS), but this can be time-consuming, given the myriad of IR and variation in patients' preferences. We aimed to develop patient profiles to inform pre-test counseling for IR. We conducted semi-structured interviews with participants as a part of a randomized trial of the GenomicsADvISER.com, a decision aid for selecting IR. Interviews explored factors participants considered when deliberating over learning IR. Interviews were analyzed by thematic analysis and constant comparison. Participants were mostly female (28/31) and about half of them were over the age of 50 (16/31). We identified five patient profiles that reflect common contextual factors, attitudes, concerns, and perceived utility of IR. Information Enthusiasts self-identified as "planners" and valued learning most or all IR to enable planning and disease prevention because "knowledge is power". Concerned Individuals defined themselves as "anxious," and were reluctant to learn IR, anticipating negative psychological impacts from IR. Contemplators were discerning about the value and limitations of IR, weighing health benefits with the impacts of not being able to "un-know" information. Individuals of Advanced Life Stage did not consider IR relevant for themselves and primarily considered their implications for family members. Reassurance Seekers were reassured by previous negative genetic test results which shaped their expectations for receiving no IR: "hopefully [GS will] be negative, too. And then I can rest easy". These profiles could inform targeted counseling for IR by providing a framework to address common values, concerns. and misconceptions.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41431-019-0352-2DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6777527PMC
July 2019

Evaluation of a decision aid for incidental genomic results, the Genomics ADvISER: protocol for a mixed methods randomised controlled trial.

BMJ Open 2018 04 26;8(4):e021876. Epub 2018 Apr 26.

University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Introduction: Genome sequencing, a novel genetic diagnostic technology that analyses the billions of base pairs of DNA, promises to optimise healthcare through personalised diagnosis and treatment. However, implementation of genome sequencing faces challenges including the lack of consensus on disclosure of incidental results, gene changes unrelated to the disease under investigation, but of potential clinical significance to the patient and their provider. Current recommendations encourage clinicians to return medically actionable incidental results and stress the importance of education and informed consent. Given the shortage of genetics professionals and genomics expertise among healthcare providers, decision aids (DAs) can help fill a critical gap in the clinical delivery of genome sequencing. We aim to assess the effectiveness of an interactive DA developed for selection of incidental results.

Methods And Analysis: We will compare the DA in combination with a brief Q&A session with a genetic counsellor to genetic counselling alone in a mixed-methods randomised controlled trial. Patients who received negative standard cancer genetic results for their personal and family history of cancer and are thus eligible for sequencing will be recruited from cancer genetics clinics in Toronto. Our primary outcome is decisional conflict. Secondary outcomes are knowledge, satisfaction, preparation for decision-making, anxiety and length of session with the genetic counsellor. A subset of participants will complete a qualitative interview about preferences for incidental results.

Ethics And Dissemination: This study has been approved by research ethics boards of St. Michael's Hospital, Mount Sinai Hospital and Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre. This research poses no significant risk to participants. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a novel patient-centred tool to support clinical delivery of incidental results. Results will be shared through national and international conferences, and at a stakeholder workshop to develop a consensus statement to optimise implementation of the DA in practice.

Trial Registration Number: NCT03244202; Pre-results.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021876DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5922516PMC
April 2018

Recurrence and variability of germline EPCAM deletions in Lynch syndrome.

Hum Mutat 2011 Apr 1;32(4):407-14. Epub 2011 Mar 1.

Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Recently, we identified 3' end deletions in the EPCAM gene as a novel cause of Lynch syndrome. These truncating EPCAM deletions cause allele-specific epigenetic silencing of the neighboring DNA mismatch repair gene MSH2 in tissues expressing EPCAM. Here we screened a cohort of unexplained Lynch-like families for the presence of EPCAM deletions. We identified 27 novel independent MSH2-deficient families from multiple geographical origins with varying deletions all encompassing the 3' end of EPCAM, but leaving the MSH2 gene intact. Within The Netherlands and Germany, EPCAM deletions appeared to represent at least 2.8% and 1.1% of the confirmed Lynch syndrome families, respectively. MSH2 promoter methylation was observed in epithelial tissues of all deletion carriers tested, thus confirming silencing of MSH2 as the causative defect. In a total of 45 families, 19 different deletions were found, all including the last two exons and the transcription termination signal of EPCAM. All deletions appeared to originate from Alu-repeat mediated recombination events. In 17 cases regions of microhomology around the breakpoints were found, suggesting nonallelic homologous recombination as the most likely mechanism. We conclude that 3' end EPCAM deletions are a recurrent cause of Lynch syndrome, which should be implemented in routine Lynch syndrome diagnostics.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/humu.21446DOI Listing
April 2011

Reasons for risk-reducing mastectomy versus MRI-screening in a cohort of women at high hereditary risk of breast cancer.

Breast 2011 Jun 8;20(3):254-8. Epub 2011 Feb 8.

Familial Cancer Program, Odette Cancer Centre, Canada.

Objective: To determine the reasons that motivate women in a cohort of women under intensive surveillance for breast cancer to undergo risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM).

Patients And Methods: Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation who were enrolled in an MRI-based breast screening study were eligible to participate in this survey. A self-administered questionnaire was given to women who did, and who did not terminate annual MRI-based surveillance in order to undergo RRM. The questionnaire included information on family history, risk perception and satisfaction with screening. In addition, women were asked to provide the principal reason for their choice of having preventive surgery or not, and were asked about their satisfaction with this choice.

Results: 246 women without breast cancer participated in the study. Of these, 39 women (16%) elected to have RRM at some point after initiating screening. Although women who had a mother or sister with breast cancer were more likely to opt for RRM than were women with no affected first-degree relative (21% versus 10%) this did not reach statistical significance. Women who perceived their breast cancer risk to be greater than 50% were more likely to opt for RRM than were women who estimated their risk to be less than 50% (19% versus 6%). Fear of cancer was the most common reason cited for choosing to have RRM (38% of respondents) followed by having had a previous cancer, (25%), then concern over their children (16%).

Conclusion: Among women with a BRCA mutation who are enrolled in an MRI-based screening program, a high perception of personal breast cancer risk and a history of breast cancer in a first-degree relative are predictors of the decision to have RRM.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2011.01.006DOI Listing
June 2011

Risk of colorectal and endometrial cancers in EPCAM deletion-positive Lynch syndrome: a cohort study.

Lancet Oncol 2011 Jan 8;12(1):49-55. Epub 2010 Dec 8.

Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands.

Background: Lynch syndrome is caused by germline mutations in MSH2, MLH1, MSH6, and PMS2 mismatch-repair genes and leads to a high risk of colorectal and endometrial cancer. We previously showed that constitutional 3' end deletions of EPCAM can cause Lynch syndrome through epigenetic silencing of MSH2 in EPCAM-expressing tissues, resulting in tissue-specific MSH2 deficiency. We aim to establish the risk of cancer associated with such EPCAM deletions.

Methods: We obtained clinical data for 194 carriers of a 3' end EPCAM deletion from 41 families known to us at the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands and compared cancer risk with data from a previously described cohort of 473 carriers from 91 families with mutations in MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or a combined EPCAM-MSH2 deletion.

Findings: 93 of the 194 EPCAM deletion carriers were diagnosed with colorectal cancer; three of the 92 women with EPCAM deletions were diagnosed with endometrial cancer. Carriers of an EPCAM deletion had a 75% (95% CI 65-85) cumulative risk of colorectal cancer before the age of 70 years (mean age at diagnosis 43 years [SD 12]), which did not differ significantly from that of carriers of combined EPCAM-MSH2 deletion (69% [95% CI 47-91], p=0·8609) or mutations in MSH2 (77% [64-90], p=0·5892) or MLH1 (79% [68-90], p=0·5492), but was higher than noted for carriers of MSH6 mutation (50% [38-62], p<0·0001). By contrast, women with EPCAM deletions had a 12% [0-27] cumulative risk of endometrial cancer, which was lower than was that noted for carriers of a combined EPCAM-MSH2 deletion (55% [20-90], p<0·0001) or of a mutation in MSH2 (51% [33-69], p=0·0006) or MSH6 (34% [20-48], p=0·0309), but did not differ significantly from that noted for MLH1 (33% [15-51], p=0·1193) mutation carriers. This risk seems to be restricted to deletions that extend close to the MSH2 gene promoter. Of 194 carriers of an EPCAM deletion, three had duodenal cancer and four had pancreatic cancer.

Interpretation: EPCAM deletion carriers have a high risk of colorectal cancer; only those with deletions extending close to the MSH2 promoter have an increased risk of endometrial cancer. These results underscore the effect of mosaic MSH2 deficiency, leading to variable cancer risks, and could form the basis of an optimised protocol for the recognition and targeted prevention of cancer in EPCAM deletion carriers.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70265-5DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3670774PMC
January 2011