Citations

Abstract The public health impact of genomic screening can be enhanced by cascade testing. However, cascade testing depends on communication of results to family members. While the barriers and facilitators of family communication have been researched following clinical genetic testing, the factors impacting the dissemination of genomic screening results are unknown. Using the pragmatic Electronic Medical Records and Genomics Network‐3 (eMERGE‐3) study, we explored the reported sharing practices of participants who underwent genomic screening across the United States. Six eMERGE‐3 sites returned genomic screening results for mostly dominant medically actionable disorders and surveyed adult participants regarding communication of results with first‐degree relatives. Across the sites, 279 participants completed a 1‐month and/or 6‐month post‐results survey. By 6 months, only 34% of the 156 respondents shared their results with all first‐degree relatives and 4% did not share with any. Over a third (39%) first‐degree relatives were not notified of the results. Half (53%) of participants who received their results from a genetics provider shared them with all first‐degree relatives compared with 11% of participants who received their results from a non‐genetics provider. The most frequent reasons for sharing were a feeling of obligation (72%) and that the information could help family members make medical decisions (72%). The most common reasons indicated for not sharing were that the family members were too young (38%), or they were not in contact (25%) or not close to them (25%). These data indicate that the professional returning the results may impact sharing patterns, suggesting that there is a need to continue to educate healthcare providers regarding approaches to facilitate sharing of genetic results within families. Finally, these data suggest that interventions to increase sharing may be universally effective regardless of the origin of the genetic result.

Abstract Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with aberrant coexpression of CD10+BCL6+MUM1+ (DLBCL-AE), classified as germinal center B cell (GCB) type by the Hans algorithm (HA), was genetically characterized. To capture the complexity of DLBCL-AE, we used an integrated approach that included gene expression profiling (GEP), fluorescence in situ hybridization, targeted gene sequencing, and copy number (CN) arrays. According to GEP, 32/54 (59%) cases were classified as GCB-DLBCL, 16/54 (30%) as activated B-cell (ABC) DLBCL, and 6/54 (11%) as unclassifiable. The discrepancy between HA and GEP was 41%. Three genetic subgroups were identified. Group 1 included 13/50 (26%) cases without translocations and mainly showing and ABC/MCD molecular profile. Group 2 comprised 11/50 (22%) cases with IRF4 alterations (DLBCL-IRF4), frequent mutations in IRF4 (82%) and NF-κB pathway genes (MYD88, CARD11, and CD79B), and losses of 17p13.2. Five cases each were classified as GCB- or ABC-type. Group 3 included 26/50 (52%) cases with 1 or several translocations in BCL2/BCL6/MYC/IGH, and GCB/EZB molecular profile predominated. Two cases in this latter group showed complex BCL2/BCL6/IRF4 translocations. DLBCL-IRF4 in adults showed a similar copy number profile and shared recurrent CARD11 and CD79B mutations when compared with LBCL-IRF4 in the pediatric population. However, adult cases showed higher genetic complexity, higher mutational load with frequent MYD88 and KMT2D mutations, and more ABC GEP. IRF4 mutations were identified only in IRF4-rearranged cases, indicating its potential use in the diagnostic setting. In conclusion, DLBCL-AE is genetically heterogeneous and enriched in cases with IRF4 alterations. DLBCL-IRF4 in adults has many similarities to the pediatric counterpart.

SEV may serve as new biomarkers for predicting the individual response of insulin sensitivity to exercising.

Background: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) affects >200 million people worldwide and is associated with high mortality and morbidity. We sought to identify genomic variants associated with PAD overall and in the contexts of diabetes and smoking status. Methods: We identified genetic variants associated with PAD and then meta-analyzed with published summary statistics from the Million Veterans Program and UK Biobank to replicate their findings. Next, we ran stratified genome-wide association analysis in ever smokers, never smokers, individuals with diabetes, and individuals with no history of diabetes and corresponding interaction analyses, to identify variants that modify the risk of PAD by diabetic or smoking status. Results: We identified 5 genome-wide significant ( P association ≤5×10 −8 ) associations with PAD in 449 548 (N cases =12 086) individuals of European ancestry near LPA (lipoprotein [a]), CDKN2BAS1 (CDKN2B antisense RNA 1), SH2B3 (SH2B adaptor protein 3) - PTPN11 (protein tyrosine phosphatase non-receptor type 11), HDAC9 (histone deacetylase 9), and CHRNA3 (cholinergic receptor nicotinic alpha 3 subunit ) loci (which overlapped previously reported associations). Meta-analysis with variants previously associated with PAD showed that 18 of 19 published variants remained genome-wide significant. In individuals with diabetes, rs116405693 at the CCSER1 (coiled-coil serine rich protein 1 ) locus was associated with PAD (odds ratio [95% CI], 1.51 [1.32–1.74], P diabetes =2.5×10 −9 , P interactionwithdiabetes =5.3×10 −7 ). Furthermore, in smokers, rs12910984 at the CHRNA3 locus was associated with PAD (odds ratio [95% CI], 1.15 [1.11–1.19], P smokers =9.3×10 −10 , P interactionwithsmoking =3.9×10 −5 ). Conclusions: Our analyses confirm the published genetic associations with PAD and identify novel variants that may influence susceptibility to PAD in the context of diabetes or smoking status.

Abstract Myelofibrosis (MF) is a clonal stem cell neoplasm characterized by abnormal JAK-STAT signaling, chronic inflammation, cytopenias, and risk of transformation to acute leukemia. Despite improvements in the therapeutic options for patients with MF, allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation remains the only curative treatment. We previously demonstrated multiple immunosuppressive mechanisms in patients with MF, including increased expression of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) on T cells compared with healthy controls. Therefore, we conducted a multicenter, open-label, phase 2, single-arm study of pembrolizumab in patients with Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System category of intermediate-2 or greater primary, post-essential thrombocythemia or post-polycythemia vera myelofibrosis that were ineligible for or were previously treated with ruxolitinib. The study followed a Simon 2-stage design and enrolled a total of 10 patients, 5 of whom had JAK2V617mutation, 2 had CALR mutation, and 6 had additional mutations. Most patients were previously treated with ruxolitinib. Pembrolizumab treatment was well tolerated, but there were no objective clinical responses, so the study closed after the first stage was completed. However, immune profiling by flow cytometry, T-cell receptor sequencing, and plasma proteomics demonstrated changes in the immune milieu of patients, which suggested improved T-cell responses that can potentially favor antitumor immunity. The fact that these changes were not reflected in a clinical response strongly suggests that combination immunotherapeutic approaches rather than monotherapy may be necessary to reverse the multifactorial mechanisms of immune suppression in myeloproliferative neoplasms. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03065400.

AbstractBiologically derived nanoparticles such as extracellular vesicles are promising candidates for therapeutic applications. In vivo toxicity of biological nanoparticles can result in tissue or organ damage, immunological perturbations, or developmental effects but cannot be readily predicted from in vitro studies. Therefore, an essential component of the preclinical assessment of these particles for their use as therapeutics requires screening for adverse effects and detailed characterization of their toxicity in vivo. However, there are no standardized, comprehensive methods to evaluate the toxicity profile of nanoparticle treatment in a preclinical model. Here, we first describe a method to prepare bovine milk‐derived nanovesicles (MNVs). These MNVs are inexpensive to isolate, have a scalable production platform, and can be modified to achieve a desired biological effect. We also describe two vertebrate animal models, mice and zebrafish, that can be employed to evaluate the toxicity profile of biologically derived nanoparticles, using MNVs as an example. Treatment‐induced organ toxicity and immunological effects can be assessed in mice receiving systemic injections of MNVs, and developmental toxicity can be assessed in zebrafish embryos exposed to MNVs in embryo water. Utilizing these animal models provides opportunities to analyze the toxicity profiles of therapeutic extracellular vesicles in vivo. © 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.Basic Protocol 1: Preparation of milk‐derived nanovesiclesBasic Protocol 2: In vivo screening for organ toxicity and immune cell profiling using miceBasic Protocol 3: In vivo developmental toxicity screening using zebrafish