Abstract:Importance: Increasing BRCA1 and BRCA2 (collectively termed herein as BRCA) gene testing is required to improve cancer management and prevent BRCA-related cancers.Objective: To evaluate mainstream genetic testing using cancer-based criteria in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and Participants: A quality improvement study and cost-effectiveness analysis of different BRCA testing selection criteria and access procedures to evaluate feasibility, acceptability, and mutation detection performance was conducted at the Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust as part of the Mainstreaming Cancer Genetics (MCG) Programme. Participants included 1184 patients with cancer who were undergoing genetic testing between September 1, 2013, and February 28, 2017.Main Outcomes and Measures: Mutation rates, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were the primary outcomes.Results: Of the 1184 patients (1158 women [97.8%]) meeting simple cancer-based criteria, 117 had a BRCA mutation (9.9%). The mutation rate was similar in retrospective United Kingdom (10.2% [235 of 2294]) and prospective Malaysian (9.7% [103 of 1061]) breast cancer studies. If traditional family history criteria had been used, more than 50% of the mutation-positive individuals would have been missed. Of the 117 mutation-positive individuals, 115 people (98.3%) attended their genetics appointment and cascade to relatives is underway in all appropriate families (85 of 85). Combining with the equivalent ovarian cancer study provides 5 simple cancer-based criteria for BRCA testing with a 10% mutation rate: (1) ovarian cancer; (2) breast cancer diagnosed when patients are 45 years or younger; (3) 2 primary breast cancers, both diagnosed when patients are 60 years or younger; (4) triple-negative breast cancer; and (5) male breast cancer. A sixth criterion-breast cancer plus a parent, sibling, or child with any of the other criteria-can be added to address family history. Criteria 1 through 5 are considered the MCG criteria, and criteria 1 through 6 are considered the MCGplus criteria. Testing using MCG or MCGplus criteria is cost-effective with cost-effectiveness ratios of $1330 per discounted QALYs and $1225 per discounted QALYs, respectively, and appears to lead to cancer and mortality reductions (MCG: 804 cancers, 161 deaths; MCGplus: 1020 cancers, 204 deaths per year over 50 years). Use of MCG or MCGplus criteria might allow detection of all BRCA mutations in patients with breast cancer in the United Kingdom through testing one-third of patients. Feedback questionnaires from 259 patients and 23 cancer team members (12 oncologists, 8 surgeons, and 3 nurse specialists) showed acceptability of the process with 100% of patients pleased they had genetic testing and 100% of cancer team members confident to approve patients for genetic testing. Use of MCGplus criteria also appeared to be time and resource efficient, requiring 95% fewer genetic consultations than the traditional process.Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that mainstream testing using simple, cancer-based criteria might be able to efficiently deliver consistent, cost-effective, patient-centered BRCA testing.

Economic evaluation of germline genetic testing for breast cancer in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Economic Evaluations of Breast Cancer Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review

Economic Evaluation of Population-Based BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutation Testing Across Multiple Countries and Health Systems

Cost-Effectiveness of Genetic Testing for All Women Diagnosed with Breast Cancer in China

A review of the cost-effectiveness of genetic testing for germline variants in familial cancer

Cost-Effectiveness of Multigene Testing for Breast and Ovarian Cancer

Economic Evaluation of Population-Based BRCA1 and BRCA2 Testing in Canada

A cost-utility analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing in high-risk breast cancer patients and family members in Thailand: a cost-effective policy in resource-limited settings

Cost-Effectiveness of Gene-Specific Prevention for Ovarian and Breast Cancer

Economic Evaluations of Interventions Addressing Inequalities in Cancer Care: A Systematic Review

Evaluation of the Cost-Effectiveness of Evidence-Based Interventions to Increase Female Breast and Cervical Cancer Screens: A Systematic Review

A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Studies on Gastric Cancer Screening

Economic evaluation of extended panel analysis in cancer patients with historical NHS diagnostic germline genetic testing - A modeling study based on real-world data

Evaluating the Integration of Genomics into Cancer Screening Programmes: Challenges and Opportunities

Evaluation of Financial Interventions in Breast Cancer Care Worldwide: A Systematic Review

Economic Evaluation Of Ultrasonography And Mammography For Breast Cancer Screening Among Women In China

Genetic counselling and testing for breast and ovarian cancer in Asia: A multinational survey of unmet needs.

Evaluation of Cancer-Based Criteria for Use in Mainstream BRCA1 and BRCA2 Genetic Testing in Patients With Breast Cancer

Breast and Cervical Cancer Screenings: A Systematic Economic Review of Patient Navigation Services

A Prospective Questionnaire-Based Study Evaluating Genetic Literacy and Impact of Brief Educational Intervention Among Breast Cancer Patients in a Low- to Middle-Income Country

Clinical breast examination: A screening tool for lower‐ and middle‐income countries