Next-generation or massively parallel sequencing has transformed the landscape of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. Panel-based genetic tests evaluate multiple genes simultaneously and rapidly. Because these tests are frequently offered in clinical settings, understanding their clinical validity and utility is critical. When evaluating the inherited risk of breast and ovarian cancers, panel-based tests provide incremental benefit compared with / genetic testing. For inherited risk of other cancers, such as colon cancer and pheochromocytoma-paraganglioma, the clinical utility and yield of panel-based testing are higher; in fact, simultaneous evaluation of multiple genes has been the historical standard for these diseases. Evaluating inherited risk with panel-based testing has recently entered clinical practice for prostate and pancreatic cancers, with potential therapeutic implications. The resulting variants of uncertain significance and mutations with unclear actionability pose challenges to service providers and patients, underscoring the importance of genetic counseling and data-sharing initiatives. This review explores the evolving merits, challenges, and nuances of panel-based testing for cancer susceptibility.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. Balmana J, Digiovanni L, Gaddam P, Walsh MF, Joseph V. 1.  et al. 2016. Conflicting interpretation of genetic variants and cancer risk by commercial laboratories as assessed by the prospective registry of multiplex testing. J. Clin. Oncol. 34:4071–78 [Google Scholar]
  2. Barrois M, Bièche I, Mazoyer S, Champème MH, Bressac-de Paillerets B, Lidereau R. 2.  2004. Real-time PCR-based gene dosage assay for detecting BRCA1 rearrangements in breast-ovarian cancer families. Clin. Genet. 65:131–36 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bean LJ, Hegde MR. 3.  2016. Gene variant databases and sharing: creating a global genomic variant database for personalized medicine. Hum. Mutat. 37:559–63 [Google Scholar]
  4. Cascón A, Comino-Méndez I, Currás-Freixes M, de Cubas AA, Contreras L. 4.  et al. 2015. Whole-exome sequencing identifies MDH2 as a new familial paraganglioma gene. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 107:djv053 [Google Scholar]
  5. Castera L, Krieger S, Rousselin A, Legros A, Baumann JJ. 5.  et al. 2014. Next-generation sequencing for the diagnosis of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer using genomic capture targeting multiple candidate genes. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 22:1305–13 [Google Scholar]
  6. Cheng HH, Pritchard CC, Boyd T, Nelson PS, Montgomery B. 6.  2016. Biallelic inactivation of BRCA2 in platinum-sensitive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur. Urol. 69:992–95 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chong HK, Wang T, Lu HM, Seidler S, Lu H. 7.  et al. 2014. The validation and clinical implementation of BRCAplus: a comprehensive high-risk breast cancer diagnostic assay. PLOS ONE 9:e97408 [Google Scholar]
  8. Churpek JE, Walsh T, Zheng Y, Moton Z, Thornton AM. 8.  et al. 2015. Inherited predisposition to breast cancer among African American women. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 149:31–39 [Google Scholar]
  9. Couch FJ, Hart SN, Sharma P, Toland AE, Wang X. 9.  et al. 2015. Inherited mutations in 17 breast cancer susceptibility genes among a large triple-negative breast cancer cohort unselected for family history of breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 33:304–11 [Google Scholar]
  10. Cragun D, Radford C, Dolinsky JS, Caldwell M, Chao E, Pal T. 10.  2014. Panel-based testing for inherited colorectal cancer: a descriptive study of clinical testing performed by a US laboratory. Clin. Genet. 86:510–20 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cybulski C, Lubinski J, Wokolorczyk D, Kuzniak W, Kashyap A. 11.  et al. 2015. Mutations predisposing to breast cancer in 12 candidate genes in breast cancer patients from Poland. Clin. Genet. 88:366–70 [Google Scholar]
  12. Desmond A, Kurian AW, Gabree M, Mills MA, Anderson MJ. 12.  et al. 2015. Clinical actionability of multigene panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk assessment. JAMA Oncol 1:943–51 [Google Scholar]
  13. Domchek SM, Bradbury A, Garber JE, Offit K, Robson ME. 13.  2013. Multiplex genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: out on the high wire without a net?. J. Clin. Oncol. 31:1267–70 [Google Scholar]
  14. Domchek SM, Friebel TM, Singer CF, Evans DG, Lynch HT. 14.  et al. 2010. Association of risk-reducing surgery in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with cancer risk and mortality. JAMA 304:967–75 [Google Scholar]
  15. Domchek SM, Nathanson KL. 15.  2014. Panel testing for inherited susceptibility to breast, ovarian, and colorectal cancer. Genet. Med. 16:827–29 [Google Scholar]
  16. Easton DF, Pharoah PD, Antoniou AC, Tischkowitz M, Tavtigian SV. 16.  et al. 2015. Gene-panel sequencing and the prediction of breast-cancer risk. N. Engl. J. Med. 372:2243–57 [Google Scholar]
  17. Favier J, Amar L, Gimenez-Roqueplo AP. 17.  2015. Paraganglioma and phaeochromocytoma: from genetics to personalized medicine. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 11:101–11 [Google Scholar]
  18. Finch APM, Lubinski J, Møller P, Singer CF, Karlan B. 18.  et al. 2014. Impact of oophorectomy on cancer incidence and mortality in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. J. Clin. Oncol. 32:1547–53 [Google Scholar]
  19. Fishbein L, Merrill S, Fraker DL, Cohen DL, Nathanson KL. 19.  2013. Inherited mutations in pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma: why all patients should be offered genetic testing. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 20:1444–50 [Google Scholar]
  20. Frey MK, Kim SH, Bassett RY, Martineau J, Dalton E. 20.  et al. 2015. Rescreening for genetic mutations using multi-gene panel testing in patients who previously underwent non-informative genetic screening. Gynecol. Oncol. 139:211–15 [Google Scholar]
  21. Frolov A, Prowse AH, Vanderveer L, Bove B, Wu H, Godwin AK. 21.  2002. DNA array-based method for detection of large rearrangements in the BRCA1 gene. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 35:232–41 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gallego CJ, Shirts BH, Bennette CS, Guzauskas G, Amendola LM. 22.  et al. 2015. Next-generation sequencing panels for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer and polyposis syndromes: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J. Clin. Oncol. 33:2084–91 [Google Scholar]
  23. Garber KB, Vincent LM, Alexander JJ, Bean LJ, Bale S, Hegde M. 23.  2016. Reassessment of genomic sequence variation to harmonize interpretation for personalized medicine. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 99:1140–49 [Google Scholar]
  24. Han FF, Guo CL, Liu LH. 24.  2013. The effect of CHEK2 variant I157T on cancer susceptibility: evidence from a meta-analysis. DNA Cell Biol 32:329–35 [Google Scholar]
  25. Harismendy O, Ng PC, Strausberg RL, Wang X, Stockwell TB. 25.  et al. 2009. Evaluation of next generation sequencing platforms for population targeted sequencing studies. Genome Biol 10:R32 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hogervorst FB, Nederlof PM, Gille JJ, McElgunn CJ, Grippeling M. 26.  et al. 2003. Large genomic deletions and duplications in the BRCA1 gene identified by a novel quantitative method. Cancer Res 63:1449–53 [Google Scholar]
  27. Hu C, Hart SN, Bamlet WR, Moore RM, Nandakumar K. 27.  et al. 2016. Prevalence of pathogenic mutations in cancer predisposition genes among pancreatic cancer patients. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 25:207–11 [Google Scholar]
  28. Huynh JM, Laukaitis CM. 28.  2016. Panel testing reveals nonsense and missense CDH1 mutations in families without hereditary diffuse gastric cancer. Mol. Genet. Genom. Med. 4:232–36 [Google Scholar]
  29. Jameson JL, Longo DL. 29.  2015. Precision medicine—personalized, problematic, and promising. N. Engl. J. Med. 372:2229–34 [Google Scholar]
  30. Judkins T, Leclair B, Bowles K, Gutin N, Trost J. 30.  et al. 2015. Development and analytical validation of a 25-gene next generation sequencing panel that includes the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes to assess hereditary cancer risk. BMC Cancer 15:215 [Google Scholar]
  31. Kapoor NS, Curcio LD, Blakemore CA, Bremner AK, McFarland RE. 31.  et al. 2015. Multigene panel testing detects equal rates of pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutations and has a higher diagnostic yield compared to limited BRCA1/2 analysis alone in patients at risk for hereditary breast cancer. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 22:3282–88 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kaufman B, Shapira-Frommer R, Schmutzler RK, Audeh MW, Friedlander M. 32.  et al. 2015. Olaparib monotherapy in patients with advanced cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation. J. Clin. Oncol. 33:244–50 [Google Scholar]
  33. King KS, Prodanov T, Kantorovich V, Fojo T, Hewitt JK. 33.  et al. 2011. Metastatic pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma related to primary tumor development in childhood or adolescence: significant link to SDHB mutations. J. Clin. Oncol. 29:4137–42 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kurian AW, Hare EE, Mills MA, Kingham KE, McPherson L. 34.  et al. 2014. Clinical evaluation of a multiple-gene sequencing panel for hereditary cancer risk assessment. J. Clin. Oncol. 32:2001–9 [Google Scholar]
  35. LaDuca H, Stuenkel AJ, Dolinsky JS, Keiles S, Tandy S. 35.  et al. 2014. Utilization of multigene panels in hereditary cancer predisposition testing: analysis of more than 2,000 patients. Genet. Med. 16:830–37 [Google Scholar]
  36. Lammens CR, Aaronson NK, Wagner A, Sijmons RH, Ausems MG. 36.  et al. 2010. Genetic testing in Li-Fraumeni syndrome: uptake and psychosocial consequences. J. Clin. Oncol. 28:3008–14 [Google Scholar]
  37. Landrum MJ, Lee JM, Benson M, Brown G, Chao C. 37.  et al. 2016. ClinVar: public archive of interpretations of clinically relevant variants. Nucleic Acids Res 44:D862–68 [Google Scholar]
  38. Lenders JW, Duh QY, Eisenhofer G, Gimenez-Roqueplo AP, Grebe SK. 38.  et al. 2014. Pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma: an endocrine society clinical practice guideline. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 99:1915–42 [Google Scholar]
  39. Lhota F, Zemankova P, Kleiblova P, Soukupova J, Vocka M. 39.  et al. 2016. Hereditary truncating mutations of DNA repair and other genes in BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2-negatively tested breast cancer patients. Clin. Genet. 90:324–33 [Google Scholar]
  40. Li J, Meeks H, Feng BJ, Healey S, Thorne H. 40.  et al. 2016. Targeted massively parallel sequencing of a panel of putative breast cancer susceptibility genes in a large cohort of multiple-case breast and ovarian cancer families. J. Med. Genet 5334–42 [Google Scholar]
  41. Lin PH, Kuo WH, Huang AC, Lu YS, Lin CH. 41.  et al. 2016. Multiple gene sequencing for risk assessment in patients with early-onset or familial breast cancer. Oncotarget 7:8310–20 [Google Scholar]
  42. Lincoln SE, Kobayashi Y, Anderson MJ, Yang S, Desmond AJ. 42.  et al. 2015. A systematic comparison of traditional and multigene panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genes in more than 1000 patients. J. Mol. Diagn. 17:533–44 [Google Scholar]
  43. Lohmueller KE, Indap AR, Schmidt S, Boyko AR, Hernandez RD. 43.  et al. 2008. Proportionally more deleterious genetic variation in European than in African populations. Nature 451:994–97 [Google Scholar]
  44. Mannan AU, Singh J, Lakshmikeshava R, Thota N, Singh S. 44.  et al. 2016. Detection of high frequency of mutations in a breast and/or ovarian cancer cohort: implications of embracing a multi-gene panel in molecular diagnosis in India. J. Hum. Genet. 61:515–22 [Google Scholar]
  45. Manrai AK, Funke BH, Rehm HL, Olesen MS, Maron BA. 45.  et al. 2016. Genetic misdiagnoses and the potential for health disparities. N. Engl. J. Med. 375:655–65 [Google Scholar]
  46. Mateo J, Carreira S, Sandhu S, Miranda S, Mossop H. 46.  et al. 2015. DNA-repair defects and olaparib in metastatic prostate cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 373:1697–708 [Google Scholar]
  47. Maxwell KN, Wubbenhorst B, D'Andrea K, Garman B, Long JM. 47.  et al. 2015. Prevalence of mutations in a panel of breast cancer susceptibility genes in BRCA1/2-negative patients with early-onset breast cancer. Genet. Med. 17:630–38 [Google Scholar]
  48. McCarthy AM, Bristol M, Domchek SM, Groeneveld PW, Kim Y. 48.  et al. 2016. Health care segregation, physician recommendation, and racial disparities in BRCA1/2 testing among women with breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 34:2610–18 [Google Scholar]
  49. Minion LE, Dolinsky JS, Chase DM, Dunlop CL, Chao EC, Monk BJ. 49.  2015. Hereditary predisposition to ovarian cancer, looking beyond BRCA1/BRCA2. . Gynecol. Oncol. 137:86–92 [Google Scholar]
  50. Mu W, Lu HM, Chen J, Li S, Elliott AM. 50.  2016. Sanger confirmation is required to achieve optimal sensitivity and specificity in next-generation sequencing panel testing. J. Mol. Diagn. 18:923–32 [Google Scholar]
  51. 51. Natl. Compr. Cancer Netw. 2016. NCCN Guidelines for genetic/familial high-risk assessment: colorectal Version 2.2016. Available at https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp
  52. 52. Natl. Compr. Cancer Netw. 2017. NCCN Guidelines for genetic/familial high-risk assessment: breast and ovarian Version 2.2017. Available at https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp
  53. Ng PS, Wen WX, Fadlullah MZ, Yoon SY, Lee SY. 53.  et al. 2016. Identification of germline alterations in breast cancer predisposition genes among Malaysian breast cancer patients using panel testing. Clin. Genet. 90:315–23 [Google Scholar]
  54. Nielsen SM, Rhodes L, Blanco I, Chung WK, Eng C. 54.  et al. 2016. Von Hippel-Lindau Disease: genetics and role of genetic counseling in a multiple neoplasia syndrome. J. Clin. Oncol. 34:2172–81 [Google Scholar]
  55. Pepin MG, Murray ML, Bailey S, Leistritz-Kessler D, Schwarze U, Byers PH. 55.  2016. The challenge of comprehensive and consistent sequence variant interpretation between clinical laboratories. Genet. Med. 18:20–24 [Google Scholar]
  56. Plon SE, Cooper HP, Parks B, Dhar SU, Kelly PA. 56.  et al. 2011. Genetic testing and cancer risk management recommendations by physicians for at-risk relatives. Genet. Med. 13:148–54 [Google Scholar]
  57. Popejoy AB, Fullerton SM. 57.  2016. Genomics is failing on diversity. Nature 538:161–64 [Google Scholar]
  58. Pritchard CC, Mateo J, Walsh MF, De Sarkar N, Abida W. 58.  et al. 2016. Inherited DNA-repair gene mutations in men with metastatic prostate cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 375:443–53 [Google Scholar]
  59. Rehm HL, Bale SJ, Bayrak-Toydemir P, Berg JS, Brown KK. 59.  et al. 2013. ACMG clinical laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing. Genet. Med. 15:733–47 [Google Scholar]
  60. Rehm HL, Berg JS, Brooks LD, Bustamante CD, Evans JP. 60.  et al. 2015. ClinGen—the Clinical Genome Resource. N. Engl. J. Med. 372:2235–42 [Google Scholar]
  61. Ricker C, Culver JO, Lowstuter K, Sturgeon D, Sturgeon JD. 61.  et al. 2016. Increased yield of actionable mutations using multi-gene panels to assess hereditary cancer susceptibility in an ethnically diverse clinical cohort. Cancer Genet 209:130–37 [Google Scholar]
  62. Robson ME. 62.  2014. Multigene panel testing: planning the next generation of research studies in clinical cancer genetics. J. Clin. Oncol. 32:1987–89 [Google Scholar]
  63. Robson ME, Bradbury AR, Arun B, Domchek SM, Ford JM. 63.  et al. 2015. American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement update: genetic and genomic testing for cancer susceptibility. J. Clin. Oncol. 33:3660–67 [Google Scholar]
  64. Sanger F, Nicklen S, Coulson AR. 64.  1977. DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors. PNAS 74:5463–67 [Google Scholar]
  65. Schiffman JD. 65.  2011. No child left behind in SDHB testing for paragangliomas and pheochromocytomas. J. Clin. Oncol. 29:4070–72 [Google Scholar]
  66. Schmidt LS, Linehan WM. 66.  2016. Genetic predisposition to kidney cancer. Semin. Oncol. 43:566–74 [Google Scholar]
  67. Schrader KA, Cheng DT, Joseph V, Prasad M, Walsh M. 67.  et al. 2016. Germline variants in targeted tumor sequencing using matched normal DNA. JAMA Oncol 2:104–11 [Google Scholar]
  68. Shirts BH, Casadei S, Jacobson AL, Lee MK, Gulsuner S. 68.  et al. 2016. Improving performance of multigene panels for genomic analysis of cancer predisposition. Genet. Med. 18:974–81 [Google Scholar]
  69. Slavin TP, Niell-Swiller M, Solomon I, Nehoray B, Rybak C. 69.  et al. 2015. Clinical application of multigene panels: challenges of next-generation counseling and cancer risk management. Front. Oncol. 5:208 [Google Scholar]
  70. Song H, Dicks E, Ramus SJ, Tyrer JP, Intermaggio MP. 70.  et al. 2015. Contribution of germline mutations in the RAD51B, RAD51C, and RAD51D genes to ovarian cancer in the population. J. Clin. Oncol. 33:2901–7 [Google Scholar]
  71. Stanislaw C, Xue Y, Wilcox WR. 71.  2016. Genetic evaluation and testing for hereditary forms of cancer in the era of next-generation sequencing. Cancer Biol. Med. 13:55–67 [Google Scholar]
  72. Stoffel EM, Mangu PB, Gruber SB, Hamilton SR, Kalady MF. 72.  et al. 2015. Hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline endorsement of the familial risk-colorectal cancer: European Society for Medical Oncology Clinical Practice Guidelines. J. Clin. Oncol. 33:209–17 [Google Scholar]
  73. Susswein LR, Marshall ML, Nusbaum R, Vogel Postula KJ, Weissman SM. 73.  et al. 2016. Pathogenic and likely pathogenic variant prevalence among the first 10,000 patients referred for next-generation cancer panel testing. Genet. Med. 18:823–32 [Google Scholar]
  74. Thomas DM, James PA, Ballinger ML. 74.  2015. Clinical implications of genomics for cancer risk genetics. Lancet Oncol 16:e303–8 [Google Scholar]
  75. Thompson ER, Rowley SM, Li N, McInerny S, Devereux L. 75.  et al. 2016. Panel testing for familial breast cancer: calibrating the tension between research and clinical care. J. Clin. Oncol. 34:1455–59 [Google Scholar]
  76. Tung N, Battelli C, Allen B, Kaldate R, Bhatnagar S. 76.  et al. 2015. Frequency of mutations in individuals with breast cancer referred for BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing using next-generation sequencing with a 25-gene panel. Cancer 121:25–33 [Google Scholar]
  77. Tung N, Domchek SM, Stadler Z, Nathanson KL, Couch F. 77.  et al. 2016. Counselling framework for moderate-penetrance cancer-susceptibility mutations. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 13:581–88 [Google Scholar]
  78. Tung N, Lin NU, Kidd J, Allen BA, Singh N. 78.  et al. 2016. Frequency of germline mutations in 25 cancer susceptibility genes in a sequential series of patients with breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 34:1460–68 [Google Scholar]
  79. van Hulsteijn LT, Dekkers OM, Hes FJ, Smit JW, Corssmit EP. 79.  2012. Risk of malignant paraganglioma in SDHB-mutation and SDHD-mutation carriers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Med. Genet 49768–76 [Google Scholar]
  80. Walsh T, Lee MK, Casadei S, Thornton AM, Stray SM. 80.  et al. 2010. Detection of inherited mutations for breast and ovarian cancer using genomic capture and massively parallel sequencing. PNAS 107:12629–33 [Google Scholar]
  81. Yorczyk A, Robinson LS, Ross TS. 81.  2015. Use of panel tests in place of single gene tests in the cancer genetics clinic. Clin. Genet. 88:278–82 [Google Scholar]
  82. Yurgelun MB, Allen B, Kaldate RR, Bowles KR, Judkins T. 82.  et al. 2015. Identification of a variety of mutations in cancer predisposition genes in patients with suspected Lynch syndrome. Gastroenterology 149:604–13e20 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error