Back to Authors

Szymaniak, Brittany M.

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8336-5010

Mayo Clinic

Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University

Citations 3

Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Endometrial, and Gastric, Version 3.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines In Oncology
Gupta, Samir , Axell, Lisen, Burke, Carol A. , Chen, Lee-may, Chung, Daniel C. , Clayback, Katherine M, Felder, Seth , Giardiello, Francis M., Gustafson, Susan, Hagemann, Andrea R. , Hall, Michael J. , Idos, Gregory , Joseph, Nora, Kassem, Nawal , Kelly, Kaitlyn, Kieber‐Emmons, AnnMarie, Kupfer, Sonia S., Lang, Katie, Llor, Xavier , Markowitz, Arnold J. , Prats, Mariana Moreno, Niell‐Swiller, Mariana, Pirzadeh‐Miller, Sara , Samadder, N. Jewel , Shibata, David , Swanson, Benjamin , Szymaniak, Brittany M. , Welborn, Jeanna, Wiesner, Georgia L. , Yurgelun, Matthew B. , Dwyer, Mary A., Darlow, Susan, Diwan, Zeenat, Samadder, Niloy Jewel, Gupta, Samir , Burke, Carol A , Hodan, Rachel , Weiss, Jennifer M. , Chung, Daniel C., Foda, Zachariah H. , Grady, William M. , Hampel, Heather , Katona, Bryson W , Outlaw, Darryl Alan , Stanich, Peter P.

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network | December 16, 2024 | Volume: 22 | Issue: 10 | Pages: 695-711

10.6004/jnccn.2024.0061 Get It

Multigene panel testing has allowed for the detection of a growing number of inherited pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in people at high risk of cancer, including endometrial cancer (EC). Hereditary syndromes associated with EC include Lynch syndrome, PTEN hamartoma tumor syndrome, and Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. This manuscript provides the latest recommendations from the NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Endometrial, and Gastric on the screening and management of EC in patients at high risk for these syndromes, as well as the advantages and limitations of multigene panel testing. This manuscript also describes recent updates to these guidelines regarding de-implementation of colon cancer screening in individuals with CHEK2 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants, based on the most up-to-date evidence regarding the association between CHEK2 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants and colon cancer risk.
BRCA1, BRCA2 , and Associated Cancer Risks and Management for Male Patients
Shevach, Jeffrey , Castro, Elena , Couch, Fergus J. , Domchek, Susan M., Eeles, Rosalind A. , Lin, Daniel W., Morgan, Todd M. , Offit, Kenneth, Schaeffer, Edward M. , Szymaniak, Brittany M. , Eeles, Rosalind A , Morgan, Todd M , Cheng, Heather H. , Couch, Fergus J. , Giri, Veda N. , Hall, Michael J. , King, Mary‐Claire , Lin, Daniel W., Loeb, Stacy , Offit, Kenneth, Pritchard, Colin C. , Vassy, Jason L. , Katona, Bryson W , Maxwell, Kara N.

JAMA Oncology | July 25, 2024 | Volume: 10 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 1272

10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.2185 Get It

Importance Half of all carriers of inherited cancer-predisposing variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 are male, but the implications for their health are underrecognized compared to female individuals. Germline variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 (also known as pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants, referred to here as BRCA1/2 PVs) are well known to significantly increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancers in female carriers, and knowledge of BRCA1/2 PVs informs established cancer screening and options for risk reduction. While risks to male carriers of BRCA1/2 PVs are less characterized, there is convincing evidence of increased risk for prostate cancer, pancreatic cancer, and breast cancer in males. There has also been a rapid expansion of US Food and Drug Administration–approved targeted cancer therapies, including poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, for breast, pancreatic, and prostate cancers associated with BRCA1/2 PVs. Observations This narrative review summarized the data that inform cancer risks, targeted cancer therapy options, and guidelines for early cancer detection. It also highlighted areas of emerging research and clinical trial opportunities for male BRCA1/2 PV carriers. These developments, along with the continued relevance to family cancer risk and reproductive options, have informed changes to guideline recommendations for genetic testing and strengthened the case for increased genetic testing for males. Conclusions and Relevance Despite increasing clinical actionability for male carriers of BRCA1/2 PVs, far fewer males than female individuals undergo cancer genetic testing. Oncologists, internists, and primary care clinicians should be vigilant about offering appropriate genetic testing to males. Identifying more male carriers of BRCA1/2 PVs will maximize opportunities for cancer early detection, targeted risk management, and cancer treatment for males, along with facilitating opportunities for risk reduction and prevention in their family members, thereby decreasing the burden of hereditary cancer.
Implementation of Germline Testing for Prostate Cancer: Philadelphia Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2019
Kelly, William Kevin, Cheng, Heather H. , Cookson, Michael S. , Dahut, William L. , Weissman, Scott M., Soule, Howard R. , Petrylak, Daniel P. , Dicker, Adam P. , AlDubayan, Saud H. , Pettaway, Curtis A. , Daly, Mary B., Mohler, James L. , Parsons, J. Kellogg , Pilarski, Robert , Blanco, Amie , Woodson, Ashley, Taplin, Mary-Ellen, Polascik, Thomas J. , Hyatt, Colette, Feng, Felix Y. , Mullane, Michael P., Powers, Jacqueline, Concepcion, Raoul S. , Lin, Daniel W. , Wender, Richard C. , Mark, James Ryan , Costello, Anthony J. , Isaacs, William B. , Xu, Jianfeng , Weitzel, Jeffrey N. , Andriole, Gerald L. , Beltran, Himisha , Briganti, Alberto , Byrne, Lindsey , Calvaresi, Anne, Chandrasekar, Thenappan , Chen, David Y.T. , Dobi, Albert , Crawford, E. David , Eastham, James A., Eggener, Scott E. , Freedman, Matthew L. , Garnick, Marc B. , Gomella, Patrick T. , Handley, Nathan , Hurwitz, Mark , Izes, Joseph K. , Karnes, R. Jeffrey , Lallas, Costas D. , Languino, Lucia R. , Loughlin, Kevin R. , Lu‐Yao, Grace , Malkowicz, S. Bruce, Mann, Mark, Mille, Patrick , Miner, Martin , Morgan, Todd M. , Mucci, Lorelei A. , Nielsen, Sarah M. , O’Neil, Brock , Pinover, Wayne H., Pinto, Peter A. , Poage, Wendy, Raj, Ganesh V. , Ryan, Charles J. , Schiewer, Matthew J. , Szymaniak, Brittany M. , Tester, William , Trabulsi, Edouard J. , Vapiwala, Neha , Gomella, Leonard G. , Weitzel, Jeffrey N , Morgan, Todd M , Cheng, Heather H , Dicker, Adam P , Giri, Veda N. , Knudsen, Karen E. , Cooney, Kathleen A. , Toland, Amanda Ewart , Pritchard, Colin C. , Carroll, Peter R , Rahm, Alanna Kulchak , Taplin, Mary‐Ellen , Helfand, Brian T. , Morgans, Alicia K. , Burnett, Arthur L. “Bud” , Sartor, Oliver , Den, Robert B. , Loeb, Stacy , López, Ana María , Moreno, Jose, Myers, Ronald E. , Rebbeck, Timothy R. , Sandler, Howard M. , Scott, E. Michael D., Yu, Evan Y , Zeigler-Johnson, Charnita M

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 9, 2020 | Volume: 38 | Issue: 24 | Pages: 2798-2811

10.1200/jco.20.00046 Get It

PURPOSE Germline testing (GT) is a central feature of prostate cancer (PCA) treatment, management, and hereditary cancer assessment. Critical needs include optimized multigene testing strategies that incorporate evolving genetic data, consistency in GT indications and management, and alternate genetic evaluation models that address the rising demand for genetic services. METHODS A multidisciplinary consensus conference that included experts, stakeholders, and national organization leaders was convened in response to current practice challenges and to develop a genetic implementation framework. Evidence review informed questions using the modified Delphi model. The final framework included criteria with strong (> 75%) agreement (Recommend) or moderate (50% to 74%) agreement (Consider). RESULTS Large germline panels and somatic testing were recommended for metastatic PCA. Reflex testing—initial testing of priority genes followed by expanded testing—was suggested for multiple scenarios. Metastatic disease or family history suggestive of hereditary PCA was recommended for GT. Additional family history and pathologic criteria garnered moderate consensus. Priority genes to test for metastatic disease treatment included BRCA2, BRCA1, and mismatch repair genes, with broader testing, such as ATM, for clinical trial eligibility. BRCA2 was recommended for active surveillance discussions. Screening starting at age 40 years or 10 years before the youngest PCA diagnosis in a family was recommended for BRCA2 carriers, with consideration in HOXB13, BRCA1, ATM, and mismatch repair carriers. Collaborative (point-of-care) evaluation models between health care and genetic providers was endorsed to address the genetic counseling shortage. The genetic evaluation framework included optimal pretest informed consent, post-test discussion, cascade testing, and technology-based approaches. CONCLUSION This multidisciplinary, consensus-driven PCA genetic implementation framework provides novel guidance to clinicians and patients tailored to the precision era. Multiple research, education, and policy needs remain of importance.