Impact of genetic counseling strategy on diagnostic yield and workload for genome-sequencing-based tumor diagnostics

Purpose: Genome sequencing (GS) enables comprehensive molecular analysis of tumors and identification of hereditary cancer predisposition. According to guidelines, directly determining pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) requires pretest genetic counseling, which is costineffe Methods: We validated GS for detection of germline variants and simulated 3 strategies using paired tumor -normal GS data of 937 metastatic patients. In strategy -1, genetic counseling before tumor testing allowed direct PGV analysis. In strategy -2 and -3, germline testing and referral for post-test genetic counseling is based on tumor variants using Dutch (strategy -2) or Europen Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Precision Medicine Working Group (strategy -3) guidelines. Results: In strategy -1, PGVs would be detected in 50 patients (number -needed -to counsel; NTC = 18.7). In strategy -2, 86 patients would have been referred for genetic counseling and 43 would have PGVs (NTC = 2). In strategy -3, 94 patients would have been referred for genetic counseling and 32 would have PGVs (NTC = 2.9). Hence, 43 and 62 patients, respectively, were unnecessarily referred based on a somatic variant. Conclusion: Both post -tumor test counseling strategies (2 and 3) had significantly lower NTC, and strategy -2 had the highest PGV yield. Combining pre -tumor test mainstreaming and posttumor test counseling may maximize the clinically relevant PGV yield and minimize unnecessary referrals. (c) 2023 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.