Willman, Cheryl L.

Abstract Basic and clinical cancer research discoveries stemming from the nation's cancer centers have markedly improved outcomes for many cancer patients. Despite this forward momentum in our progress against this complex disease, cancer in all its forms remains a major public health challenge that touches the lives of nearly every American, either directly or indirectly. The newly formed AACR Cancer Centers Alliance will accelerate the pace of discovery by providing an ongoing mechanism for transferring new knowledge, sharing resources, developing national demonstration projects, and driving innovation that impacts cancer science, cancer care delivery, and science and health policy.

Summary: Basic and clinical cancer research discoveries stemming from the nation's cancer centers have markedly improved outcomes for many cancer patients. Despite this forward momentum in our progress against this complex disease, cancer in all its forms remains a major public health challenge that touches the lives of nearly every American, either directly or indirectly. The newly formed AACR Cancer Centers Alliance will accelerate the pace of discovery by providing an ongoing mechanism for transferring new knowledge, sharing resources, developing national demonstration projects, and driving innovation that impacts cancer science, cancer care delivery, and science and health policy.

Abstract Two inherited autosomal dominant cancer predisposition conditions - BRCA related hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) and Lynch syndrome (LS) - are termed Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tier 1 (CDCT1) genetic conditions, for which early identification and intervention have a positive impact on public health. Selection of individuals for genetic testing for these conditions is based on personal and family history. The goal of this study was to evaluate whether screening in a tertiary medical center using exome sequencing could efficiently identify carriers of HBOC and LS and to determine the frequency of incremental carriers identified outside of traditional clinical practice guidelines. Participants from three geographically diverse Mayo Clinic practices in the USA (Rochester MN, Phoenix AZ, Jacksonville FL) consented to clinical “Exome+” sequencing (Helix, San Mateo, CA; Mayo GeneGuide, Rochester, MN) in the TAPESTRY study (NCT05212428), which links sequencing data with electronic health records and the return of CDCT1 genetic findings. For this study we focused on two inherited cancer predisposition conditions: BRCA-related HBOC (BRCA1 and BRCA2) and LS (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2 and EPCAM). Detailed chart review to collect demographic information, personal and family history, and assessment of clinical practice guidelines for genetic evaluation (National Cancer Control Network 2021). To date, 44,306 patients have enrolled and sequenced in TAPESTRY. Annotation and interpretation of all variants in 7 genes for HBOC and LS resulted in identification of 550 carriers (prevalence 1.24%) which included 387 with HBOC (27.2% BRCA1, 42.8% BRCA2) and 163 with LS (12.3% MSH6, 8.8% PMS2, 4.5% MLH1, 3.8% MSH2 and 0.2% EPCAM). Demographics of the cohort included: 62.7% female, mean age 55.2 years, non-white race 9.6% and 3.8% Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. A personal history of cancer was present in 46.4% of test positive patients, including 22.5% of HBOC patients with breast or ovarian cancer and 20.9% of LS patients with colorectal or uterine cancer. More than half of the patients (52.1%) were newly diagnosed with HBOC and LS based on the results of this study. Overall, 39.2% of HBOC/LS carriers identified through Exome+ sequencing did not satisfy NCCN criteria for genetic evaluation, this was higher for LS (56.2%) compared to HBOC (32%). Amongst those newly diagnosed with HBOC/LS (n=286), NCCN criteria were not satisfied in 60% of cases (78% for LS and 51% for HBOC). Of the pathogenic germline variant carriers who met NCCN guidelines for testing, 34.2% were not aware of their diagnosis prior to participation in this study. Our results emphasize the need for wide genomic screening for CDCT1 cancer predisposition syndromes. Such screening could identify at-risk carriers of HBOC and LS, who would not otherwise be identified through clinical practice guidelines. Citation Format: Emily Gay, Niloy Jewel Samadder, Michelle L. Bublitz, Melanie M. Peterson, Tammy A. Wilson, Lorelei A. Bandel, Sebastian M. Armasu, Robert A. Vierkant, Matthew J. Ferber, Eric W. Klee, Nicholas B. Larson, Teresa M. Kruisselbrink, Timothy B. Curry, Jan B. Egan, Jennifer L. Kemppainen, Jessa S. Bidwell, Jennifer L. Anderson, Tammy M. McAllister, T'Nita S. Walker, Katie L. Kunze, Vanda Lindpere, Michael A. Golafshar, Margaret Klint, Richard J. Presutti, William V. Bobo, Aleksander Sekulic, Jolene M. Summer Bolster, Cheryl L. Willman, Konstantinos N. Lazaridis. Genetic screening in a tertiary medical center identifies carriers of cancer predisposition diseases that would be missed by clinical guidelines [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 5768.

Abstract Hereditary factors play a role in the development of several cancers. Identification of germline predisposition can have implications for treatment and cancer prevention. While previous studies have found that universal multigene panel testing in patients with cancer yields increased detection of actionable heritable variants compared to targeted testing, patients belonging to racial and ethnic minority groups have been underrepresented in these studies. We undertook a prospective multi-site study of germline alternations among solid tumor cancer patients from under-represented minority (URM) populations receiving care at Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Centers between January 2020 and November 2022. Patients with a new or active cancer diagnosis (all stages) not selected for family history of cancer were tested with a >80-gene next generation sequencing panel. Of 532 patients (mean [SD] age, 57.2 [12.7] years; 320 (60.2%) female), 247 (46.4%) were Hispanic/Latino, 130 (24.4%) Black/African American, 80 (15.0%) Asian, 66 (12.4%) American Indian/Alaskan Native, 2 (0.4%) Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and 7 (1.3%) other. PGV were found in 43 patients (8.1%), including 29 moderate- or high- penetrance cancer susceptibility genes. Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) were found in 272 patients (51.1%). Of those with a PGV, 29 (67.4%) had incremental clinically actionable findings that would not have been detected by established testing criteria, of which 16 were moderate- or high-penetrance variants. Younger age of diagnosis, gender, race, ethnicity, and stage of disease were not predictive of PGV. In this study of under-represented minority cancer patients, universal genetic testing found that 1 in 12 patients harbor a PGV, more than two-thirds of whom would remain undetected using current guidelines. The paucity of genomic data in URM populations also results in a large proportion of VUS which may lead to under-estimation of disease associated variants. Table 1. Clinical and Demographic Characteristics of Included Patients Positive Negative VUS Total N (%) 43 217 272 532 (8.1%) (40.8%) (51.1%) Age - mean (SD) 53.7 57.0 57.8 57.2 (12.7) (12.6) (12.8) (12.7) Gender - Female 26 132 162 320 (60.5%) (60.8%) (59.6%) (60.2%) Race/Ethnicity Hispanic/Latino 24 110 113 247 (55.8%) (50.7%) (41.5%) (46.4%) Black/African 5 56 69 130 American (11.6%) (25.8%) (25.4%) (24.4%) Asian 10 (23.3%) 23 (10.6%) 47 (17.3%) 80 (15.0%) American Indian/Alaskan Native 4 (9.3%) 26 (12.0%) 36 (13.2%) 66 (12.4%) Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (0.7%) 2 (0.4%) Other 0 (0.0%) 2 (0.9%) 5 (1.8%) 7 (1.3%) Tumor Types Breast 19 (44.2%) 80 (36.9%) 110 (40.4%) 209 (39.3%) CNS 1 (2.3%) 2 (0.9%) 1 (0.4%) 4 (0.8%) GI 7 (16.3%) 46 (21.2%) 58 (21.3%) 111 (20.9%) GU 8 (18.6%) 57 (26.3%) 62 (22.8%) 127 (23.9%) GYN 0 (0.0%) 8 (3.7%) 10 (3.7%) 18 (3.4%) Head/Neck 5 (11.6%) 8 (3.7%) 6 (2.2%) 19 (3.6%) Lung 0 (0.0%) 6 (2.8%) 11 (4.0%) 17 (3.2%) Melanoma 0 (0.0%) 2 (0.9%) 1 (0.4%) 3 (0.6%) Sarcoma 2 (4.7%) 4 (1.8%) 4 (1.5%) 10 (1.9%) Other 1 (2.3%) 4 (1.8%) 9 (3.3%) 14 (2.6%) Citation Format: Kevork A. Khadarian, Sailaja Pisipati, Jeremy C. Jones, Gerardo Colon-Otero, Donald W. Northfelt, Lindsey Gary, Idara U. Ekpoh, Giovanna G. Moreno, Edward D. Esplin, Robert Nussbaum, Brandie Heald, Margaret A. Klint, Kathleen A. Barrus, Tanios S. Bekaii-Saab, Aleksandar Sekulic, Michael A. Golafshar, Katie L. Kunze, Cheryl L. Willman, Konstantinos N. Lazaridis, Niloy Jewel Samadder. Universal genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes in an under-represented minority population [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 1921.

Abstract Background: Engaging diverse populations in cancer genomics research is of critical importance and is a fundamental goal of the NCI Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing (PE-CGS) Network. Established as part of the Cancer Moonshot, PE-CGS is a consortium of stakeholders including clinicians, scientists, genetic counselors, and representatives of potential study participants and their communities. Participant engagement is an ongoing, bidirectional, and mutually beneficial interaction between study participants and researchers. PE-CGS sought to set priorities in participant engagement for conducting the network's research. Methods: PE-CGS deliberatively engaged its stakeholders in the following four-phase process to set the network's research priorities in participant engagement: (i) a brainstorming exercise to elicit potential priorities; (ii) a 2-day virtual meeting to discuss priorities; (iii) recommendations from the PE-CGS External Advisory Panel to refine priorities; and (iv) a virtual meeting to set priorities. Results: Nearly 150 PE-CGS stakeholders engaged in the process. Five priorities were set: (i) tailor education and communication materials for participants throughout the research process; (ii) identify measures of participant engagement; (iii) identify optimal participant engagement strategies; (iv) understand cancer disparities in the context of cancer genomics research; and (v) personalize the return of genomics findings to participants. Conclusions: PE-CGS is pursuing these priorities to meaningfully engage diverse and underrepresented patients with cancer and posttreatment cancer survivors as participants in cancer genomics research and, subsequently, generate new discoveries. Impact: Data from PE-CGS will be shared with the broader scientific community in a manner consistent with participant informed consent and community agreement.

Abstract The capacity and diversity of the oncology leadership workforce has not kept pace with the emerging needs of our increasingly complex cancer centers and the spectrum of challenges our institutions face in reducing the cancer burden in diverse catchment areas. Recognizing the importance of a diverse workforce to reduce cancer inequities, the Association of American Cancer Institutes conducted a survey of its 103 cancer centers to examine diversity in leadership roles from research program leaders to cancer center directors. A total of 82 (80%) centers responded, including 64 National Cancer Institute–designated and 18 emerging centers. Among these 82 respondents, non-Hispanic White individuals comprised 79% of center directors, 82% of deputy directors, 72% of associate directors, and 72% of program leaders. Women are underrepresented in all leadership roles (ranging from 16% for center directors to 45% for associate directors). Although the limited gender, ethnic, and racial diversity of center directors and perhaps deputy directors is less surprising, the demographics of current research program leaders and associate directors exposes a substantial lack of diversity in the traditional cancer center senior leadership pipeline. Sole reliance on the cohort of current center leaders and leadership pipeline is unlikely to produce the diversity in cancer center leadership needed to facilitate the ability of those centers to address the needs of the diverse populations they serve. Informed by these data, this commentary describes some best practices to build a pipeline of emerging leaders who are representative of the diverse populations served by these institutions and who are well positioned to succeed.

Abstract While American Indian Tribes and communities are highly diverse in ethnicity, language, and culture, there is one unfortunate characteristic they share: profound cancer health disparities. Compounded by low rates of cancer screening and more limited access to healthcare, American Indians are more often diagnosed at later stages of disease and have the poorest outcomes in all types of cancer when compared to any other racial and ethnic group in the United States (Jamal et al. JNCI 2017; Sep; 109(9)). American Indians and Alaskan Natives (AI/AN) across the U.S. are impacted by a significantly higher incidence of several cancers when compared to non-Hispanic Whites (NHW): hepatocellular carcinoma; renal cell carcinoma; and cancers of the biliary tree (gall bladder and cholangiocarcinoma). In terms of mortality, AI/AN have the nation’s highest rate of death from liver cancer (2.2-fold > NHW) and a 1.9-fold higher rate of death from kidney cancer. The incidence of colorectal cancer in AI/AN communities has also increased significantly. The cause of these significant cancer disparities is undoubtedly multifactorial. In addition to low rates of cancer screening, other contributing factors include differences in access to healthcare and timely interventions; distinct cultural perspectives and beliefs regarding cancer etiology, screening, and treatment; differences in diet, obesity, metabolism, and risk behaviors (including tobacco, alcohol, and intravenous drug use); variable rates of vaccination and treatment for Hepatitis, HPV, and other viruses; ancestry-related biologic and genetic factors; and differences in environmental exposures. In the American Southwest, exposure of Tribal communities to environmental and carcinogenic toxins, including exposure to toxins such as aristolochic acid and aflatoxin, and to mining wastes from abandoned hard rock and uranium mines must also be considered. Experimental and epidemiologic studies have linked exposure to mining wastes that contaminate western watersheds (containing highly toxic metal mixtures of arsenic, uranium, cadmium, and other metals) to increased cancer risk in Tribal and non-Tribal communities (Environ Health Perspect. 2014;122(4):363; Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2013;22(11):1944.).A virtually unexplored factor which may also contribute to cancer health disparities in AI/AN communities is whether the cancers that arise in American Indians have a distinct spectrum of somatic and germline genomic mutations (somatic and germline) resulting from these factors. Unfortunately, AI/AN cancer patients have been strikingly understudied to date, accounting for < 0.5% of all patients studied in national cancer genomic initiatives. Cancer genomic studies previously conducted by our team of investigators in the NCI TARGET Project (https://ocg.cancer.gov > programs > target) focused on high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) discovered that patients with a high degree of indigenous genetic ancestry had a unique spectrum of mutations in genes encoding tyrosine kinases or genes regulating tyrosine kinase pathways. All patients with this mutation spectrum had a significantly poorer overall outcome, despite treatment with intensive therapies. Recent studies have found a unique spectrum and frequency of mutations and mutational signatures in kidney cancers arising in indigenous communities (Trent, J. et al; unpublished). Our NCI-funded Participant Engagement-Cancer Genome Sequencing (PE-CGS) Research Center (NCI U2C CA252973: Engagement of American Indians of Southwestern Tribal Nations in Cancer Genomic Sequencing; MPIs: Willman and Jeffrey Trent, PhD) is seeking to overcome this knowledge gap through direct participant engagement and collaborative research partnerships with Tribal nations and communities. A proper framework for engagement of indigenous Tribal Nations and tribal participants in research includes respect for Tribal sovereignty; engagement of participants and communities in project selection and oversight; assuring that the research is beneficent; the use of culturally-appropriate approaches for informed consent; appropriate data sharing, assurance of data privacy, and data interpretation and communication, including the need to engage AI/AN participants and communities in the development of culturally appropriate interpretive data narratives; sensitivities regarding collection and approval for use of biospecimens, particularly future use; concerns over genetic privacy, protection of individual identity, and assurance that molecular means of ancestry determination in individual Tribal members will not interfere with Tribal means of cultural identify and their Tribal membership; and joint sharing in intellectual property and the benefits of discoveries. It is our hypothesis that through appropriate participant and community engagement and comprehensive genomic sequencing, we will discover novel somatic and germline mutations, differences in the spectrum and/or frequency of cancer-promoting mutations, and genome-wide mutational signatures reflective of behaviors and exposures, that can ultimately be translated to improved cancer screening, precision prevention, and therapeutic intervention in American Indian participants and communities. Citation Format: Cheryl L. Willman. A framework for community-engaged participatory research in cancer genomic sequencing: A collaborative with sovereign tribal nations in the American southwest [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr PL03-05.