Rumilla, Kandelaria M.

Abstract Background Professional medical societies recommend that carrier screening for 113 different genetic disorders be offered during pregnancy or preconception to all individuals, regardless of ancestry, in order to provide more equitable opportunities for patients to ascertain their reproductive risks. In our clinical laboratory experience, however, the vast majority of healthcare providers continue to order carrier screening for only cystic fibrosis (CF), which is disproportionately common in white individuals of Northern European descent. Our highest volume CF screening test is performed on >10,500 diverse patients per year and utilizes a targeted genotyping array that detects >500 variants in CFTR and >1200 variants in >150 other pertinent genes. Here we report the inequities in diagnostic yield among our first 8,000 patients for whom only limited testing was ordered and examine the barriers to widespread adoption of more inclusive carrier screening. Methods Three carrier screening options (CF, CF+spinal muscular atrophy [SMA], CF+SMA+fragile X syndrome [FXS]+hemoglobinopathies) were ordered clinically and performed on DNA extracted from 8,000 whole blood samples from unique individuals utilizing a custom SNP array (Thermo Fisher GeneTitanTM platform) designed to detect >1700 pathogenic variants in 218 different genes. Data was retrospectively reviewed to determine overall detection rates for carriers of all recommended conditions vs. only the condition(s) included in the originally ordered service. Finally, reproductive health providers at nine different ordering sites across the U.S. were interviewed regarding their current carrier screening practices. Results Patients were referred for testing by 119 different clinical facilities. 98.1% (7847/8000) had CF-only testing ordered, 1.2% (99/8000) had CF+SMA testing ordered, and 0.68% (54/8000) had testing for CF+SMA+FXS+hemoglobinopathies ordered. 7.1% (568/8000) of patients had reportable variants in CFTR. Had CF+SMA testing been ordered on all 8,000 patients, however, the diagnostic yield would have been 8.9%. Of the patients who had CF-only or CF+SMA testing ordered, 11.9% (943/7946) were found to be carriers of hemoglobinopathies. Finally, had all 8000 patients had testing for all currently recommended targets on the panel, the diagnostic yield would have increased to 55% (4396/8000). Ordering providers at 9/50 different contacted sites agreed to interview requests. 100% (9/9) of respondents indicated that their patients experience significant disparities in access to carrier screening, and that the primary cause of these inequities was insufficient insurance reimbursement. 67% (6/9) of respondents indicated that >50% of their patient population identified as non-white and would have “very strongly” benefitted from “testing for other disorders beyond CF.” Conclusions Despite clinical practice guidelines urging for more population-neutral carrier screening, major gaps exist between what is recommended versus ultimately ordered. This significantly limits the clinical utility of testing, especially in patients from underrepresented backgrounds. Improved insurance coverage for more inclusive carrier screening is needed to help reduce such disparities.

Cystic fibrosis is caused by biallelic pathogenic variants in the CFTR gene, which contains a polymorphic (TG)mTn sequence (the “poly-T/TG tract”) in intron 9. While T9 and T7 alleles are benign, T5 alleles with longer TG repeats, e.g., (TG)12T5 and (TG)13T5, are clinically significant. Thus, professional medical societies currently recommend reporting the TG repeat size when T5 is detected. Sanger sequencing is a cost-effective method of genotyping the (TG)mTn tract; however, its polymorphic length substantially complicates data analysis. We developed CFTR-TIPS, a freely available web-based software tool that infers the (TG)mTn genotype from Sanger sequencing data. This tool detects the (TG)mTn tract in the chromatograms, quantifies goodness of fit with expected patterns, and visualizes the results in a graphical user interface. It is broadly compatible with any Sanger chromatogram that contains the (TG)mTn tract ± 15 bp. We evaluated CFTR-TIPS using 835 clinical samples previously analyzed in a CLIA-certified, CAP-accredited laboratory. When operated fully automatically, CFTR-TIPS achieved 99.8% concordance with our clinically validated manual workflow, while generally taking less than 10 s per sample. There were two discordant samples: one due to a co-occurring heterozygous duplication that confounded the tool and the other due to incomplete (TG)mTn tract detection in the reverse chromatogram. No clinically significant misclassifications were observed. CFTR-TIPS is a free, accurate, and rapid tool for CFTR (TG)mTn tract genotyping using cost-effective Sanger sequencing. This tool is suitable both for automated use and as an aid to manual review to enhance accuracy and reduce analysis time.

A 74-year-old male presented with rectal pain; workup uncovered an anal mass, and a diagnosis of melanoma was rendered via histologic examination and immunohistochemical (IHC) studies. Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR)–based BRAF testing was performed and revealed the presence of BRAF V600E, which is a common targetable genetic alteration in melanoma. Interestingly, the ratio of mutant to wild-type copy number was low (0.3%), whereas tumor cell percentage on tissue slides was 90%. With additional workup, BRAF V600E IHC confirmed a very small subset of BRAF V600E–positive cells, and a next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel revealed a pathogenic KIT variant, p.L576P, with an allele frequency of 63%. It was initially hypothesized that the main driver of the melanoma was the KIT alteration, whereas a small subclone (not detected by NGS, which has a 5% limit of detection) was driven by the BRAF V600E detected by ddPCR. To determine whether there were morphologic differences between the 2 clones, a careful review of the histology was performed and revealed distinct morphology of the BRAF V600E–positive cells, including pale cytoplasm, nuclear grooves, and infiltrating eosinophils. Additional IHC workup of the BRAF V600E–positive cells showed coexpression of CD1a, Langerin, and S100, diagnostic of Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH). This diagnosis was unexpected and would have been missed without highly sensitive molecular testing; yet it is of clinical importance for the patient. This case raises interesting biology questions regarding the relationship between melanoma and LCH; moreover, it highlights the importance of integrating quantitative information in molecular data interpretation.

IntroductionAdamantinoma‐like Ewing sarcoma (ALES) is a rare aggressive malignancy occasionally diagnosed in the thyroid gland. ALES shows basaloid cytomorphology, expresses keratins, p63, p40, frequently CD99, and harbours the t(11;22) EWSR1::FLI1 translocation. There is debate on whether ALES resembles more sarcoma or carcinoma.MethodsWe performed RNA sequencing from two ALES cases and compared findings with skeletal Ewing's sarcomas and nonneoplastic thyroid tissue. ALES was investigated by in situ hybridization (ISH) for high‐risk human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA and immunohistochemistry for the following antigens: keratin 7, keratin 20, keratin 5, keratins (AE1/AE3 and CAM5.2), CD45, CD20, CD5, CD99, chromogranin, synaptophysin, calcitonin, thyroglobulin, PAX8, TTF1, S100, p40, p63, p16, NUT, desmin, ER, FLI1, INI1, and myogenin.ResultsAn uncommon EWSR1::FLI transcript with retained EWSR1 exon 8 was detected in both ALES cases. Regulators of EWSR1::FLI1 splicing (HNRNPH1, SUPT6H, SF3B1) necessary for production of a functional fusion oncoprotein, as well as 53 genes (including TNNT1, NKX2.2) activated downstream to the EWSR1::FLI1 cascade, were overexpressed. Eighty‐six genes were uniquely overexpressed in ALES, most of which were related to squamous differentiation. Immunohistochemically, ALES strongly expressed keratins 5, AE1/AE3 and CAM5.2, p63, p40, p16, and focally CD99. INI1 was retained. The remaining immunostains and HPV DNA ISH were negative.ConclusionComparative transcriptomic profiling reveals overlapping features of ALES with skeletal Ewing's sarcoma and an epithelial carcinoma, as evidenced by immunohistochemical expression of keratin 5, p63, p40, CD99, the transcriptome profile, and detection of EWSR1::FLI1 fusion transcript by RNA sequencing.

Abstract Anti-IgA may cause anaphylactic transfusion reactions in IgA-deficient individuals. Testing for IgG anti-IgA is useful to identify persons at risk. This report describes an immunoassay for anti-IgA that uses polyclonal IgA coupled to fluorescent microspheres as an immunosorbent. Anti-IgA is detected by phycoerythrin-labeled anti-IgG. The assay is calibrated in arbitrary units by use of a serum that contains anti-IgA. Dose-response studies with sera that contain anti-IgA showed positive responses at dilutions up to 32-fold greater than the dilution used to test patients’ samples. Inhibition studies with purified IgA and IgA-deficient serum showed no inhibition with IgA-deficient serum and complete inhibition with soluble IgA. Clinical tests performed in more than 90 assays had a CV of 13.6 percent for measurements of an internal positive control. The fluorescent immunoassay method is rapid, reproducible, and sensitive to low concentrations of IgG anti-IgA. Immunohematology 2009;25:24–28.

e21057 Background: BRAF, NRAS, CDKN2A and P53 mutations are commonly observed pathogenic mutations in cutaneous melanoma. The influence of mutations such as BRAF, NRAS, CDKN2A and P53 on treatment response in the PD1 inhibitor era has not been well defined. Methods: This study included patients with melanoma with a cutaneous or unknown primary. All patients had genomic profiling with the Mayo Clinic 50-gene solid tumor mutation panel. Treatment response to first line immunotherapy with PD1, CTLA-4, or combination PD1/CTLA-4 inhibitors were assessed by response rate and time-to-progression (TTP) rate at 12 months. Each patient outcome was stratified by non-mutually exclusive gene mutation status into BRAF, NRAS, P53, CDKN2A, or quadruple negative (N4) groups. Results: Genomic profiling was performed on 208 patients, of whom 102 received first line immunotherapy. Most patients received a PD1 inhibitor (n = 62), followed by CTLA-4 inhibitor (n = 34), and combination therapy (n = 6). A trend towards improved outcomes was observed in CDKN2A and BRAF mutated patients with worse outcomes noted in P53, N4, and NRAS patients. The percent without progression at 12 months were BRAF 52.2%, CDKN2A 58.2%, NRAS 30.5%, P53 37.7%, and N4 26.7% (see table below). Response rates were BRAF 46.4%, CDKN2A 38.5%, NRAS 22.2%, P53 40.0%, and N4 33.3%. Conclusions: There is a trend towards improved outcomes with immunotherapy in BRAF and CDKN2A mutated patients while P53, NRAS and N4 patients have inferior outcomes. [Table: see text]

BACKGROUNDDespite the success of immune checkpoint and targeted therapy, many patients with melanoma ultimately require further treatment. The combination of carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab (CPB) has demonstrated promising activity in a single‐arm study. In the current study, the authors performed a randomized phase 2 study to confirm efficacy and to determine whether adding everolimus would increase the activity of the combination.METHODSThrough the North Central Cancer Treatment Group, a total of 149 patients with unresectable AJCC 6th edition stage IV melanoma were randomized from May 2010 to May 2014 to either CPB or CPB with everolimus (CPBE). The primary endpoint was progression‐free survival (PFS), with secondary endpoints of overall survival (OS), response rate, and tolerability.RESULTSThe CPB and CPBE treatment arms were balanced with regard to age (median age: 59 years vs 58 years) and high lactate dehydrogenase (48% vs 51%), but were unbalanced with regard to sex (male sex: 72% vs 55%; P = .03). Overall, there was no difference noted with regard to PFS, with a median PFS of 5.6 months for CPB versus 5.1 months for CPBE (hazard ratio [HR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.81‐1.62 [P = .44]), or for OS, with a median OS of 14.5 months for CPB versus 10.8 months for CPBE (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.84‐1.84). The confirmed response rate was 13% for CPB and 23% for CPBE (P = .13). Toxicity was higher for CPBE compared with CPB (83% for grade 3 + and 14% for grade 4 + vs 63% for grade 3 + and 11% for grade 4+, respectively) (toxicities were graded using the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program of the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4.0]). Common grade 3 + toxicities were neutropenia, leukopenia, and fatigue, which occurred in both treatment arms with comparable frequency.CONCLUSIONSBoth experimental arms demonstrated activity, with a PFS of >5 months. However, the addition of everolimus to CPB failed to improve outcomes, with increased toxicity noted. These findings replicate the moderate antitumor activity of CPB, with future development possibly in combination with targeted or immunotherapy. Cancer 2018;124:537‐45. © 2017 American Cancer Society.