The English National Lynch Syndrome Registry

Comprising over 9,000 patients with Lynch syndrome….Aims to improve the treatment of all patients living with the genetic condition.

Researchers from the Institute of Cancer Research (ICR), in collaboration with the National Disease Registration Service, the NHS Genomic Medicine Service Alliances and the NHS Regional Clinical Genetics Services, have set up the UK’s first-ever comprehensive database registry for Lynch syndrome patients to prevent cancer.

 “By centralising patients’ genetic data, together with detailed information about the cancer diagnosis and treatments that these patients have received, researchers will gain crucial insights into Lynch syndrome… [unlocking] new opportunities for precision medicine and prevention, ultimately improving the lives of patients living with the condition.”

https://pharmatimes.com/news/icr-collaboration-forms-national-nhs-patient-database-registry-for-lynch-syndrome-patients/#:~:text=Researchers%20from%20the%20Institute%20of,Lynch%20syndrome%20patients%20to%20prevent

Lack of association between screening interval and cancer stage in Lynch syndrome may be accounted for by over-diagnosis; a prospective Lynch syndrome database report

Recent epidemiological evidence shows that colorectal cancer (CRC) continues to occur in carriers of pathogenic mismatch repair (path_MMR) variants despite frequent colonoscopy surveillance in expert centres. This observation conflicts with the paradigm that removal of all visible polyps should prevent the vast majority of CRC in path_MMR carriers, provided the screening interval is sufficiently short and colonoscopic practice is optimal.

Our findings raise the possibility that some CRCs in path_MMR carriers may spontaneously disappear: the host immune response may not only remove CRC precursor lesions in path_MMRcarriers, but may remove infiltrating cancers as well. If confirmed, our suggested interpretation will have a bearing on surveillance policy for path_MMR carriers.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30858900

Managing menopause after cancer

Managing menopausal symptoms after cancer can be challenging, and more severe than at natural menopause. Menopausal symptoms can extend beyond hot flushes and night sweats (vasomotor symptoms). Treatment-induced symptoms might include sexual dysfunction and impairment of sleep, mood, and quality of life.

Menopausal hormone therapy is an effective treatment for vasomotor symptoms and seems to be safe for many patients with cancer.

When hormone therapy is contraindicated or avoided, emerging evidence supports the efficacy of non-pharmacological and non-hormonal treatments, although most evidence is based on women older than 50 years with breast cancer. 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673623028027?dgcid=coauthor#fig2

FRIGE scientists initiate study on hereditary cancer

Identifying Lynch syndrome patients early on can be beneficial since there are several cancer screening and prevention strategies which can be used to reduce risk of developing cancer by half.

Considering the significant burden of this disease and opportunities to prevent cancers in these patients, the team at FRIGE lead by Dr. Harsh Sheth attracted funding to systematically study the prevalence of Lynch syndrome in cancers of oesophagous, stomach, liver, pancreas, small intestine and endometrium.

At this moment, we know very little about pan-cancer prevalence of Lynch syndrome and age-specific risk of cancers in the Indian population. It is astounding that Lynch syndrome can affect risk of cancers of oesophagous, stomach, liver, pancreas, small intestine and endometrium- which collectively is found in approximately 1 in every 8 patients seen in cancer clinics across India. Furthermore, it is remarkable considering that according to the WHO, nearly 1 in 300 people are estimated be Lynch syndrome carriers.

The study through its unique design will also collect data on patient’s lifestyle, diet and exercise, and will subsequently follow the patients for three years to see which factors contribute to the risk of cancer.

This would provide a tremendous opportunity to clinicians and genetic counsellors to offer personalised cancer surveillance and cancer risk reducing interventions to Lynch syndrome carriers of Indian origin.

The investigators through this study will provide the most comprehensive insight into the epidemiology and risk factors that contribute to cancer development in Lynch syndrome patients from India.

https://geneticcentre.org/news/frige-scientists-initiate-study-on-hereditary-cancer

Germline Cancer Susceptibility Gene Testing in Unselected Patients With Colorectal Adenocarcinoma: A Multicenter Prospective Study

Hereditary factors play a role in the development of colorectal cancer (CRC). Identification of germline predisposition can have implications on treatment and cancer prevention. 

Conclusions:

Universal multigene panel testing in CRC was associated with a modest, but significant, detection of heritable mutations over guideline-based testing. One in 10 patients had changes in their management based on test results. Uptake of cascade family testing was low, which is a concerning observation that warrants further study.

https://www.cghjournal.org/article/S1542-3565(21)00447-X/fulltext

Frameshift mutations in peripheral blood as a biomarker for surveillance of Lynch syndrome

Lynch syndrome (LS) is a hereditary cancer predisposition syndrome caused by germline mutations in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes, which lead to high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) and frameshift mutations (FSMs) at coding mononucleotide repeats (cMNRs) in the genome. Recurrent FSMs in these regions are thought to play a central role in the increased risk of various cancers. However, there are no biomarkers currently available for the surveillance of MSI-H-associated cancers.

Conclusions

They demonstrated that FSMs can be detected in cfDNA from MSI-H/MMRd cases and asymptomatic carriers. The 122-target FSM panel described here has promise as a tool for improved surveillance of MSI-H/MMRd carriers with the potential to reduce the frequency of invasive screening methods for this high-cancer-risk cohort.

The addition of this FSM-based biomarker panel could be used in parallel with LS monitoring in treatment and prevention settings.

https://academic.oup.com/jnci/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jnci/djae060/7625568?login=false

Reliable Information….

Check out www.thisisGo.ie

An online personalised resource for you and yours who have been impacted by a gynaecological cancer.

Menopause is a unique experience for every women.

Getting the correct information is key. http://thisisGO.ie gives you relevant, up to date and factual information on all aspects. Reflecting national @MenoAfterCancer and international studies. Check us out!

Evaluation of a Mindfulness-based Stress Reduction Programme on the Quality of Life of Survivors living with secondary cancer

This study reports that the MBSR program had a retained effect on wellbeing through continued use of mindfulness practices after the course, and an integration of these practices into the lives of those living with advanced cancer. The monthly mindfulness meetings are a very valuable addition to the MBSR programme.

The practice of mindfulness instructs participants to deliberately focus on the present and monitor their experiences at the time without passing judgment. As a result, participants experience some of the benefits through the mind-body connection, focusing on the positive as well as improved peer support from their peers in the groups. The monthly mindfulness meetings were also a valuable addition to the programme.

This study also showed that the MBSR program had a retained effect on wellbeing after ending the programme through continued use and integration of mindfulness techniques into the lives of those living with advanced cancer.

Although there are limitations...They concluded that the MBSR Programme is both feasible and beneficial for people living with secondary cancer.

Lynch Choices

Do you have Lynch Syndrome?

  • Lynch syndrome is an inherited condition that increases the chance of developing certain cancers. The type of cancer depends on the genes involved.
  • This website helps people with Lynch to make choices that are right for them. It is designed to be used with support from the genetics service, GPs, healthcare teams in the community, charities and patient groups.
  • If you are concerned about Lynch but have not been diagnosed, please speak to your GP or genetics service.
  • Each session helps you think about your choices at home, so you are ready to talk through your choices with a GP, genetics or other specialist.

Cancer Research UK has funded codesign of Lynch Choices https://canchoose.org.uk to support decisions.

Please complete a short survey https://southampton.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_1FvPJJEZPVX62aO to tell us what you think. We need people from all backgrounds.

Thank you.

My observations and disappointments as a Patient Advocate for Bowel Cancer/Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Patients in Ireland

Thank you Patricia for devoting your valuable time to trying to improve the Situation in Ireland.

This is what Patricia wrote…..


Some of you may not like what I have to say here but those who met me will know I am always honest and frank in my views. 

My advocacy work has been done as part of our Irish Colorectal Cancer Community but in this email I wanted to share my personal views.  I am now at end of life and under the care of community palliative care.  I was diagnosed 3 years ago (at 47 years of age) with metastatic colorectal cancer (early onset Colorectal Cancer: eoCRC) and I have been fortunate to have lived a good quality of life for 3 years on systemic treatment which allowed me to engage in advocacy. 

Early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC)is colon cancer or rectal cancer diagnosed before the age of 50.  The American Cancer Society says the incidence of eoCRC is expected to increase more than 140% by 2030.  Watch this video to learn more: ASCO eoCRC Global Trends 

I became an advocate for a number of reasons and the primary one was to try to improve outcomes for patients who come after me.   I was shocked at how CRC in Ireland seemed to be ignored; I had previously had breast cancer and I couldn’t understand how little attention CRC received.  It also gave me a purpose while living with my diagnosis as I was losing so many other parts of my life to this terrible disease.

Over the last 18 months as a patient advocate I looked to see how Ireland could improve the preventive and diagnostic pathways for patients so CRC is caught early.  These improvements are too late for me but they are critical so that others can be diagnosed earlier. The priority changes I would want to see are:

  • Access to diagnostics pathways to address the need of patients below 59 who are not met by the poor Bowel screening programme in Ireland
  • Better education and awareness with GPs so symptomatic patients are not dismissed as being too young with the rise of Early Onset Colorectal Cancer
  • Guidelines and diagnostic options for GPs (GP Guidelines) that reflect the rise of Colorectal Cancer (CRC) in people under the screening age

I know how long it takes to implement changes in Ireland and I could see our nearest neighbours updating their guidelines to reflect the new needs.  I attended the Bowel Cancer UK event in Stormont to hear what the new diagnostic pathways being implemented there and I watched as the US and Australia dropped screening ages to 45. On #medtwitter I was seeing researchers, medics and charities talking about this – but where were the people in Ireland?

I expected funds and resources would be invested in the prevention and early diagnosis of CRC – it can be found as polyps even before cancer develops and all economic models support earlier screening.  There must be lots of research and investment in this area – right?  

  • I assumed someone must be doing something out there for the 2,562 patients diagnosed each year with 1,001 deaths per annum (female 423, male 579).  
  • There is a bowel screening programme so surely more can be done for these patients – the screening programme is way behind global leading practice and people are being diagnosed too late and dying as a result.
  • Based on the available NCRI data (2018-2020.), there are more CRC deaths per annum (1,001) than the combined deaths from the other 2 screening programmes –  cervical (89) and breast cancer (748)
  • I feel that one consequence of the cervical cancer scandal is that other screening programmes, especially Bowel, are not prioritised and there is a fear of change.  5 times morewomen die of CRC (423) each year than cervical cancer (89). If you follow @hseNCCP and @NSShse on Twitter you think they only cover Cervical Cancer. 

I started reaching out and began with the Irish Cancer Society – I assumed our primary cancer charity, with a research arm, would be focusing on working with their partners to ensure our health guidelines and policy were being prioritized in line with what I was seeing happening in other western countries.  When we spoke of eoCRC it was the first time they even seemed to know this was something worth thinking about and I see no pro-active engagement.  I expect they will reach out soon for the mandatory patient stories and photo ops for April’s Bowel Cancer Awareness month.

I also met with the NCCP to present our priorities, a meeting that took 3 months to arrange and for which I had spent precious days and weeks preparing the priorities.  The meeting opened with the NCCP saying they have no agenda, no one bothered to read what was sent, our views and opinions were dismissed.  I personally have never felt so angry in my professional career about the way I and my fellow advocates on the call were treated.  CRC (Bowel Cancer) GP guidelines and prevention are not a priority for the NCCP.  If I look at the  NCCP board minutes. CRC (Bowel Cancer) is barely mentioned apart from Bowel Screening update figures as an FYI.  I asked about the Endoscopy Working Committee and their recommendations, I received no information and it appears that they do not currently meet.  NCCP colleagues declined the invitation to attend the seminar (Let’s Talk about Colorectal Cancer) last year.  I guess no one wants a spotlight on these blind spots and gaps.  Based on where things are now it will be at least 2027/2028 before any change could be implemented and this is only if it actually makes the list of things to look at.

For politicians, the answers to any parliamentary questions clearly show the lack of any urgency to reassess the current strategy.  The question you need to ask is how we are catching the disease in the under 59s? Would this level of deflection and delay be accepted for Breast Cancer patients? Imagine the Joe Duffy Liveline calls.

Within the  Research Community I was assuming that with all the millions of euros spent in Ireland across the charity, university and hospital networks I would find people who were working on research that would make sure Irish CRC patients are not left behind.  But I guess that is where I was further disappointed.  There is so much PR around research in Ireland, photo shoots, poster presentations, PPI awards.  This is a small country, all highly connected and networked but it feels like a world of silos and individual and institutional priorities –  not the priorities of the Irish public and patients who fund much of this.  

After reflecting on my meetings, chats, interactions and conferences there are a number of areas of research I was would like you to reflect on:

  1. What is the last research project that improved the outcome for any significant cohort of patients in Ireland, specifically a CRC patient?
  2. Why is there no research funding in Ireland addressing preventive and pragmatic topics that can actually be implemented for the population?
  3. Where is the medical community – surgeons, GPs, oncologists – who should be shouting for changes as they see their waiting rooms fill up with more and more younger patients? 
  4. What happens to the research from Health Economists that show the cost effectiveness of better screening programmes?  I’ve seen the presentations but who does anything with this?  
  5. Why is so much focus on research on medical oncology drugs where the international and commercial community are already spending billions?  We are wasting money and time repeating research already done.

I will end where I should have started – the Patient.

My question on patient involvement is why do you want it in the first place?  My experience is that it looks good for photos, funding and PR but considering the type of research being undertaken, there is often actually little value for either party and just a waste of energy.   And if it is that important, then here are my experiences and why I would not be supporting research unless theses issues are addressed:

  1. Patient views dismissed when not in line with the research or policy idea – what is the point of getting patient input when the research idea is already defined?
  2. My experience is that researchers have very little knowledge about the disease and the patient’s lived experience, making incorrect assumptions and they do not know how to engage with patients.  For example, a researcher asked for my input in his final funding stage – my feedback was dismissed when I challenged some aspects. My  experience as a patient with 2 years on different treatments was refuted. 
  3. There is no standard PPI engagement model, no defined way of working with patients or compensating them.  I was often the only person not being paid for my contribution. It is left to each researcher or function to figure it out.  Patients are often not compensated at all, and definitely not for travel expenses to participate in events they are asked to join, do your staff get paid taxi and train fares when needed?  You do realise you automatically exclude patients who may have lost their income and cannot afford to participate.   The All4One vouchers I received recently as compensation are not accepted by the funeral directors I was meeting that afternoon.

I’ve had good experiences over this time that give hope.  The amazing commitment from the Marie Keating Foundation.  The recent establishment of the RSCI PriCAN centre, though this needs to be expanded to CRC.   And finally, I hope to see the results of the Cancer Trials Ireland patient-led survey to understand the experience of living with metastatic breast cancer.  Recommendations must be implemented for all cancers, not only breast cancer patients, the experiences are the same.

In summary, the Irish health system is failing patients to prioritise early diagnosis and is not prepared for the rise in eoCRC in the coming years.

I am sure some of you may dispute what I have written but this is my experience and I believe it is important to get these words on a page and share with this community.  I want to thank all of you who were generous with your time and insights and I know that some on this email will agree with many of my points.  

Be mindful and respectful of patients, don’t just use them for funding approvals and photo opportunities.

I ask that you consider what I have said, assess your organisations’ commitment to CRC and prioritise prevention and early detection of CRC and save hundreds of lives.  This is one of the cancers that can be found at a pre-cancerous polyp stage.

Finally, please support the Marie Keating Colorectal/ Bowel Cancer Awareness Call to Action campaign that will launch in April.  You might see or hear from me again there.

Thank you for reading to the end.

Patricia