DETERMINATION OF INDIVIDUAL GENETIC RISK OF MALIGNANT TUMORS IN RELATIVES OF ENDOMETRIAL CANCER PATIENTS
Keywords:
genetic counseling, endometrial cancer, genetic cancer risk assessment, family history of cancer.Abstract
Summary. Objective: to analyze the family history of cancer
and assess the personified genetic risk of oncological pathology in relatives of the I and II degree relatives, patients with
endometrial cancer (EC). Object and methods: clinical and
genealogical maps and pedigrees were created during the examination of 526 people of the Kyiv region, with a morphologically confirmed diagnosis of EC, who were treated at the
Department of oncogynecology at the National Cancer Institute of the Ministry of Health ofUkraine. Methods: clinicalgenealogical, mathematical-statistical. Results: based on
the analysis of clinical-genealogical results the study identified a number of regularities that allowed the development
of algoritm of the genetic risk (Rc) of oncological pathology
in family members of patients with EC. This indicator was
evaluated as follows: the risk of developing cancer was considered high with values of Rc > 6.7% for relatives under
the age of 50 years old and > 7.3% for relatives older then
50 years old. It was determined a tendency to the increased
genetic risk of cancer and its numerical equivalent in percentages for relatives of proband patients in EC with aggregation in their pedigrees of oncological pathology of various
genesis. Conclusion: determination of the personified genetic risk of oncological pathology based on the family history
of cancer will provide an opportunity for the timely detection
of persons at an increased risk of developing this disease and
appointment of diagnostic and therapeutic measures at the
stage of pre-clinical manifestation of the disease.
References
Negrini S, Gorgoulis VG, Halazonetis TD. Genomic instability — an evolving hallmark of cancer. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol
; 11 (3): 220–8.
Weiderpass E, Labrèche F. Malignant tumors of the female reproductive system. Saf Health Work 2012; 3 (3): 166–80.
Tzortzatos G, Wersäll O, Danielsson KG, et al. Familial cancer among consecutive uterine cancer patients in Sweden. Hered Cancer Clin Pract 2014; 12 (1): 14.
Nordsborg RB, Meliker JR, Ersbøll AK, et al. Space-time clusters of breast cancer using residential histories: A Danish casecontrol study. BMC Cancer 2014; 14 (1): 255.
Glushchenko NM, Nesina IP, Iurchenko NP, et al. Risk assessment of cancer of the female reproductive system. Exp Oncol 2014; 36 (3): 207–11.
Olden K, White SL. Health-related disparities: influence of environmental factors. Med Clin North Am 2005; 89 (4): 721–38.
Cancer in Ukraine 2016–2017. Morbidity, Mortality, Indicators of the Oncology Service Activity. Bull Natl Cancer Register Ukr. Kyiv, 2018; 19: 136 p. (in Ukrainian).
Wong A, Ngeow J. Hereditary syndromes manifesting as endometrial carcinoma: how can pathological features aid risk assessment? Biomed Res Int 2015; 219012. 17 p.
Buchynska LG, Glushchenko NM, Nesina IP, Iurchenko NP. Risk of malignant neoplasms in families of ovarian cancer patients. Oncol J 2016; 10 (4): 70–6 (in Russian).
Julian-Reynier C, Welkenhuysen M, Hagoel L, et al.Risk communication strategies: state of the art and effectiveness in the context of cancer genetic services. Eur J Hum Genet 2003; 11 (10): 725–36.
Aretz S, Friedl W. Opinion on moderate/low cancer genetic risk markers in medical practice. Hered Cancer Clin Pract
; 6 (2): 61–3.
Backes FJ, Mitchell E, Hampel H, Cohn DE. Endometrial cancer patients and compliance with genetic counseling: room for improvement. Gynecol Oncol 2011; 123 (3): 532–6.
Lu KH, Wood ME, Daniels M, et al.American Society of Clinical Oncology Expert Statement: collection and use of a cancer family history for oncology providers. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32 (8): 833–40.
Randall LM, Pothuri B. The genetic prediction of risk for gynecologic cancers. Gynecol Oncol 2016; 141 (1): 10–6.
Win AK, Reece JC, Ryan S. Family history and risk of endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 125 (1): 89–98.
Glushchenko NM, Iurchenko NP, Nesina IP, Buchynska LG. Clinico-genealogical and genetic-mathematical approach
to the assessment of susceptibility to female’s organs reproductive system cancer. Oncology 2013; 15 (2): 104–7 (in Ukrainian).
Chekhun VF, Buchynska LG, Nesina IP, et al. Patent of
Ukraine on an Useful Model № a 126425 «Method of Determination of Individual Risk of Development of Oncologic Pathology in Families of Persons with a Hysterocarcinoma», R.E. Kavetsky Institute of Experimental Pathology, Oncology and Radiobiology of NAS of Ukraine, 25.06.2018, Bulletin 2018, № 12 (in Ukrainian).
Hampel H, Bennett RL, Buchanan A, et al.A practice guideline from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the National Society of Genetic Counselors: referral indications for cancer predisposition assessment. Genet Med 2015; 17 (1): 70–87.
Kastrinos F, Uno H, Ukaegbu C, et al. Development and validation of the PREMM5 model for comprehensive risk assessment of Lynch Syndrome. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35 (19): 2165–72.
Goverde A, Spaander MCW, Nieboer D, et al. Evaluation of current prediction models for Lynch syndrome: updating the PREMM5 model to identify PMS2 mutation carriers. Fam Cancer 2018; 17 (3): 361–70.
Baranova AV, Yankovsky NK. Tumor suppressor genes. Mol Biol 1998; 32 (2): 177–87.
Trubnikov VI, Gindilis VM. Table method of the component expansion of phenotypic variance based on correlations between relatives. Genetika 1981; 17 (6): 1107–16.
