Mutations in the glucocerebrosidase (GBA) gene have emerged as a common risk factor for the development of Parkinson disease (PD). This association was originally reported in case reports and case series involving patients with Gaucher disease (GD),^1,2 an autosomal recessive lysosomal storage disease resulting from mutations in both alleles of GBA. Gaucher disease is the most common genetic disorder in the Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) population. Among AJ individuals, most patients with GD carry at least 1 N370S allele, a missense mutation associated with type 1 GD, the milder nonneuronopathic form. Glucocerebrosidase heterozygosity is also associated with PD based on case-control studies comparing mutation frequency in patients with PD and control participants in different ethnic groups.^1,3-10 Among patients with PD, at least 15% of AJ individuals and 3% of non-AJ individuals carry 1 of the 2 most common GBA mutations (N370S and L444P).⁷ A multicenter analysis estimated the odds ratio for carrying a GBA mutation in patients with PD vs control participants at 5.43 (95% CI, 3.89-7.57).⁷ However, data on the reverse association—the risk for PD in GBA heterozygotes—have been limited and widely variable, with penetrance estimations between 10.9% and 29.7% by 80 years of age.^11-13 Furthermore, it is unclear whether the risk for PD is different among those carrying 2 mutant GBA alleles (ie, patients with GD) and those with 1 mutant allele (heterozygote carriers).

Since its description by Li and Fraumeni over 40 years ago, Li–Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) remains one of the most striking familial cancer predisposition syndromes. Children and adults are affected by a wide array of cancers that occur predominantly at younger ages. This review discusses LFS, describes its association with TP53, and examines the classic and evolving definitions of the syndrome. The potential implications of multigene assessments of individuals at increased cancer risk, which have already begun to identify those with very little personal or family cancer history carrying germline TP53 mutations, are considered. Newer options in the management of individuals with LFS are also discussed, highlighting the importance of further clinical trials for cancer detection, prevention, and management. Finally, we observe how the clinical criteria for TP53 mutation screening appear to be evolving as our understanding of the impact of germline TP53 mutations continues to expand.

ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by providers and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases, or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 ( online only) for more. PURPOSE: To guide use of multigene panels for germline genetic testing for patients with cancer. METHODS: An ASCO Expert Panel convened to develop recommendations on the basis of a systematic review of guidelines, consensus statements, and studies of germline and somatic genetic testing. RESULTS: Fifty-two guidelines and consensus statements met eligibility criteria for the primary search; 14 studies were identified for Clinical Question 4. RECOMMENDATIONS: Patients should have a family history taken and recorded that includes details of cancers in first- and second-degree relatives and the patient's ethnicity. When more than one gene is relevant based on personal and/or family history, multigene panel testing should be offered. When considering what genes to include in the panel, the minimal panel should include the more strongly recommended genes from Table 1 and may include those less strongly recommended. A broader panel may be ordered when the potential benefits are clearly identified, and the potential harms from uncertain results should be mitigated. Patients who meet criteria for germline genetic testing should be offered germline testing regardless of results from tumor testing. Patients who would not normally be offered germline genetic testing based on personal and/or family history criteria but who have a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant identified by tumor testing in a gene listed in Table 2 under the outlined circumstances should be offered germline testing. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/molecular-testing-and-biomarkers-guidelines .

EGFR activation is both a key molecular driver of disease progression and the target of a broad class of molecular agents designed to treat advanced cancer. Nevertheless, resistance develops through several mechanisms, including activation of AKT signaling. Though much is known about the specific molecular lesions conferring resistance to anti-EGFR–based therapies, additional molecular characterization of the downstream mediators of EGFR signaling may lead to the development of new classes of targeted molecular therapies to treat resistant disease. We identified a transcriptional network involving the tumor suppressors Krüppel-like factor 6 (KLF6) and forkhead box O1 (FOXO1) that negatively regulates activated EGFR signaling in both cell culture and in vivo models. Furthermore, the use of the FDA-approved drug trifluoperazine hydrochloride (TFP), which has been shown to inhibit FOXO1 nuclear export, restored sensitivity to AKT-driven erlotinib resistance through modulation of the KLF6/FOXO1 signaling cascade in both cell culture and xenograft models of lung adenocarcinoma. Combined, these findings define a novel transcriptional network regulating oncogenic EGFR signaling and identify a class of FDA-approved drugs as capable of restoring chemosensitivity to anti-EGFR–based therapy for the treatment of metastatic lung adenocarcinoma.

Purpose To date, there has not been a large, systematic evaluation of the prevalence of germline risk variants in urothelial carcinoma (UC). Methods We evaluated the frequency of germline pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants in 1038 patients with high-risk UC who underwent targeted clinical germline testing. Case–control enrichment analysis was performed to screen for pathogenic variant enrichment in 17 DNA repair genes in 1038 UC patients relative to cancer-free individuals. Results Among 1038 patients with UC, the cumulative frequency of patients with pathogenic variants was 24%; 18.6% of patients harbored ≥1 actionable germline variant with preventive or therapeutic utility. MSH2 (34/969, 3.5%) and BRCA1/2 (38/867, 4.4%) germline variants had the highest frequency. Germline variants in DNA damage repair genes accounted for 78% of pathogenic germline variants. Compared to the cancer-free cohort, UC patients had significant variant enrichment in MSH2 (odds ratio [OR]: 15.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.1–32.7, p < 0.0001), MLH1 (OR: 15.9, 95% CI: 4.4–67.7, p < 0.0001), BRCA2 (OR: 5.7, 95% CI: 3.2–9.6, p < 0.0001), and ATM (OR: 3.8, 95% CI: 1.8–8.3, p = 0.02). Conclusion In this study, 24% of UC patients harbored pathogenic germline variants and 18.6% had clinically actionable variants. MLH1 and MSH2 were validated as UC risk genes while ATM and BRCA2 were highlighted as potential UC predisposition genes. This work emphasizes the utility of germline testing in selected high-risk UC cohorts.