PURPOSE: To analyze the prevalence of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of HRD in PDAC from PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases, and online cancer genomic data sets. The main outcome was pooled prevalence of somatic and germline mutations in the better characterized HRD genes ( BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, ATM, ATR, CHEK2, RAD51, and the FANC genes). The secondary outcomes were prevalence of germline mutations overall, and in sporadic and familial cases; prevalence of germline BRCA1/2 mutations in Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ); and prevalence of HRD based on other definitions (ie, alterations in other genes, genomic scars, and mutational signatures). Random-effects modeling with the Freeman-Tukey transformation was used for the analyses. PROSPERO registration number: (CRD42020190813). RESULTS: Sixty studies with 21,842 participants were included in the systematic review and 57 in the meta-analysis. Prevalence of germline and somatic mutations was BRCA1: 0.9%, BRCA2: 3.5%, PALB2: 0.2%, ATM: 2.2%, CHEK2: 0.3%, FANC: 0.5%, RAD51: 0.0%, and ATR: 0.1%. Prevalence of germline mutations was BRCA1: 0.9% (2.4% in AJ), BRCA2: 3.8% (8.2% in AJ), PALB2: 0.2%, ATM: 2%, CHEK2: 0.3%, and FANC: 0.4%. No significant differences between sporadic and familial cases were identified. HRD prevalence ranged between 14.5%-16.5% through targeted next-generation sequencing and 24%-44% through whole-genome or whole-exome sequencing allowing complementary genomic analysis, including genomic scars and other signatures (surrogate markers of HRD). CONCLUSION: Surrogate readouts of HRD identify a greater proportion of patients with HRD than analyses limited to gene-level approaches. There is a clear need to harmonize HRD definitions and to validate the optimal biomarker for treatment selection. Universal HRD screening including integrated somatic and germline analysis should be offered to all patients with PDAC.

The last decade has seen rapid progress in the use of genomic tests, including gene panels, whole‐exome sequencing, and whole‐genome sequencing, in research and clinical cancer care. These advances have created expansive opportunities to characterize the molecular attributes of cancer, revealing a subset of cancer‐associated aberrations called driver mutations . The identification of these driver mutations can unearth vulnerabilities of cancer cells to targeted therapeutics, which has led to the development and approval of novel diagnostics and personalized interventions in various malignancies. The applications of this modern approach, often referred to as precision oncology or precision cancer medicine , are already becoming a staple in cancer care and will expand exponentially over the coming years. Although genomic tests can lead to better outcomes by informing cancer risk, prognosis, and therapeutic selection, they remain underutilized in routine cancer care. A contributing factor is a lack of understanding of their clinical utility and the difficulty of results interpretation by the broad oncology community. Practical guidelines on how to interpret and integrate genomic information in the clinical setting, addressed to clinicians without expertise in cancer genomics, are currently limited. Building upon the genomic foundations of cancer and the concept of precision oncology, the authors have developed practical guidance to aid the interpretation of genomic test results that help inform clinical decision making for patients with cancer. They also discuss the challenges that prevent the wider implementation of precision oncology.

Substantial progress in recent years has dramatically increased our knowledge of the molecular basis of cancer, revealing new potential therapeutic targets and paving the way for effective personalised medicine for the treatment of many tumour types. However, pancreatic cancer has been lagging behind in this success and continues to be one of the most lethal solid malignancies. Its molecular heterogeneity and the unselected design of the majority of clinical trials to date can in part explain the reason for our failure to make a significant change in the survival outcomes for patients with pancreatic cancer. A changing paradigm in drug development is required to validate the new molecular taxonomy and to rapidly translate preclinical discovery into clinical trials. Here, we review the molecular subtyping of pancreatic cancer, the challenges in identifying effective treatment regimens according to defined low-prevalence molecular subgroups and we illustrate a new model of translational therapeutic development that was established in the U.K. (Precision-Panc) as a potentially effective solution to improve outcomes for patients with pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has an extremely poor prognosis and represents a major public health issue, as both its incidence and mortality are expecting to increase steeply over the next years. Effective screening strategies are lacking, and most patients are diagnosed with unresectable disease precluding the only chance of cure. Therapeutic options for advanced disease are limited, and the treatment paradigm is still based on chemotherapy, with a few rare exceptions to targeted therapies. Germline variants in cancer susceptibility genes—particularly those involved in mechanisms of DNA repair—are emerging as promising targets for PDAC treatment and prevention. Hereditary PDAC is part of the spectrum of several syndromic disorders, and germline testing of PDAC patients has relevant implications for broad cancer prevention. Germline aberrations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are predictive biomarkers of response to poly(adenosine diphosphate–ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib and platinum-based chemotherapy in PDAC, while mutations in mismatch repair genes identify patients suitable for immune checkpoint inhibitors. This review provides a timely and comprehensive overview of germline aberrations in PDAC and their implications for clinical care. It also discusses the need for optimal approaches to better select patients for PARP inhibitor therapy, novel therapeutic opportunities under clinical investigation, and preclinical models for cancer susceptibility and drug discovery.

Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations (gBRCAm) can inform pancreatic cancer (PC) risk and treatment but most of the available information is derived from white patients. The ethnic and geographic variability of gBRCAm prevalence and of germline BRCA (gBRCA) testing uptake in PC globally is largely unknown. We carried out a systematic review and prevalence meta-analysis of gBRCA testing and gBRCAm prevalence in PC patients stratified by ethnicity. The main outcome was the distribution of gBRCA testing uptake across diverse populations worldwide. Secondary outcomes included: geographic distribution of gBRCA testing uptake, temporal analysis of gBRCA testing uptake in ethnic groups, and pooled proportion of gBRCAm stratified by ethnicity. The study is listed under PROSPERO registration number #CRD42022311769. A total of 51 studies with 16 621 patients were included. Twelve of the studies (23.5%) enrolled white patients only, 10 Asians only (19.6%), and 29 (56.9%) included mixed populations. The pooled prevalence of white, Asian, African American, and Hispanic patients tested per study was 88.7%, 34.8%, 3.6%, and 5.2%, respectively. The majority of included studies were from high-income countries (HICs) (64; 91.2%). Temporal analysis showed a significant increase only in white and Asians patients tested from 2000 to present (P < 0.001). The pooled prevalence of gBRCAm was: 3.3% in white, 1.7% in Asian, and negligible (<0.3%) in African American and Hispanic patients. Data on gBRCA testing and gBRCAm in PC derive mostly from white patients and from HICs. This limits the interpretation of gBRCAm for treating PC across diverse populations and implies substantial global and racial disparities in access to BRCA testing in PC.