Differential features of colorectal cancers fulfilling Amsterdam criteria without involvement of the mutator pathway

Microsatellite instability in the management of colorectal cancer

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a form of genetic instability caused by alterations in the DNA mismatch repair system. Approximately 15% of colorectal cancers display MSI due to a germline mutation in one of the mismatch repair genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2) or to epigenetic silencing of MLH1. Colorectal cancers with MSI have distinctive features, including a tendency to arise in the proximal colon, poor differentiation, lymphocytic infiltration and mucinous or signet-ring histology. Patients with MSI tumors appear to have a better prognosis than those with microsatellite stable tumors, but curiously the responses to 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy regimens are poorer with MSI tumors. Preliminary data suggest possible advantages of irinotecan-based regimens, but these findings need validation in well-designed clinical trials.

Lower gastrointestinal tract cancer predisposition syndromes

Although inherited predisposition to colorectal cancer (CRC) has been suspected for more than 100 years, definitive proof of Mendelian syndromes had to await maturation of molecular genetic technologies. Since the l980s, the genetics of several clinically distinct entities has been revealed. Five disorders that share a hereditary predisposition to CRC are reviewed in this article.

Microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer: from molecular oncogenic mechanisms to clinical implications

BACKGROUND

Microsatellite instability (MSI) constitutes an important oncogenic molecular pathway in colorectal cancer (CRC), representing approximately 15% of all colorectal malignant tumours. In roughly one third of the cases, the underlying DNA mismatch repair (MMR) defect is inherited through the transmission of a mutation in one of the genes involved in MMR, predominantly MSH2 and MLH1, or less frequently, MSH6 or PMS2. In the overwhelming number of sporadic cases, MSI results from epigenetic MLH1 silencing through hypermethylation of its promoter. MMR deficiency promotes colorectal oncogenesis through the accumulation of numerous mutations in crucial target genes harbouring mononucleotide repeats, notably in those involved in the control of cell proliferation and differentiation, as well as DNA damage signalling and repair.

DESIGN

In this review, we describe the molecular aspects of the MMR system and the biological consequences of its defect on the oncogenic process, and we discuss the various experimental systems used to evaluate the efficacy of cytotoxic drugs on MSI colorectal cells lines. There is increasing evidence showing that MSI CRCs differ from all CRCs in terms of prognosis and response to the treatment. We report the clinical studies that have evaluated the prognostic and predictive value of MSI status on clinical outcome in patients treated with various chemotherapy regimens used in the adjuvant setting or for advanced CRCs.

CONCLUSION

In view of this, the opportunity of a systematic MSI phenotyping in the clinical management of patients with CRC is further discussed.

Lynch syndrome in Tunisia: first description of clinical features and germline mutations

PURPOSE

High rates of early colorectal cancers (CRC) are observed in Tunisia suggesting genetic susceptibility. Nevertheless, up to now, no molecular study has been performed in the Tunisian population. In our research, we evaluated the clinical characteristics of Tunisian families suspected of Lynch syndrome and the contribution of DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes.

METHODS

Thirty-one unrelated families suspected of Lynch syndrome were studied. Probands were tested for the presence of germline mutations in the MMR genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and in MUTYH. Available tumours were analysed for microsatellite instability and expression of MMR proteins. Detailed family and medical histories were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 134 cancers were noted in the 31 families, the most frequent type of cancer corresponding to CRC (69%), followed by uterine cancer (7.5%). Germline mutations were identified in 11 (35.5%) families (six MSH2, five MLH1, including seven novel mutations), seven of which fulfilled the Amsterdam criteria (sensitivity, 63.6%; positive predictive value, 58.3%). Noteworthy, germline mutations were detected in 52.6% of male patients tested, but in only 8.3% of females (p = 0.02). Moreover, CRC were essentially left sided in families without detected mutation (p = 0.017). Ages of onset of cancers and tumour spectrum were very similar in families with or without MMR germline mutation, contrasting with previous studies performed in other populations.

CONCLUSIONS

MMR genes contribute significantly to CRC susceptibility in the Tunisian population. However, the cause of early CRC susceptibility remains unknown in most cases, especially in women and in patients with early left colon or rectal cancer.

Analysis of the oxidative damage repair genes NUDT1, OGG1, and MUTYH in patients from mismatch repair proficient HNPCC families (MSS-HNPCC)

PURPOSE

Several studies have described molecular differences between microsatellite stable hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (MSS-HNPCC) and microsatellite unstable Lynch syndrome tumors (MSI-HNPCC). These differences highlight the possibility that other instability forms could explain cancer susceptibility in this group of families. The base excision repair (BER) pathway is the major DNA repair pathway for oxidative DNA damage. A defect in this pathway can result in DNA transversion mutations and a subsequent increased cancer risk. Mutations in MUTYH have been associated with increased colorectal cancer (CRC) risk while no association has been described for OGG1 or NUDT1.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

We performed mutational screening of the three genes involved in defense against oxidative DNA damage in a set of 42 MSS-HNPCC families.

RESULTS

Eight rare variants and 5 frequent variants were found in MSS-HNPCC patients. All variants were previously described by other authors except variant c.285C>T in OGG1. Segregation studies were done and in silico programs were used to estimate the level of amino acid conservation, protein damage prediction, and possible splicing alterations. Variants OGG1 c.137G>A; MUTYH c.1187G>A were detected in Amsterdam I families and cosegregate with cancer. Analysis of OGG1 c.137G>A transcripts showed an inactivation of the splicing donor of exon 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Two rare variants (OGG1 c.137G>A; MUTYH c.1187G>A) and one common polymorphism (NUDT1 c.426C>T) were associated with CRC risk. We show that the BER pathway can play a significant role in a number of MSS-HNPCC colorectal cancers. More studies could be of interest in order to gain further understanding of yet unexplained CRC susceptibility cases.

Clinical genetics of hereditary colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common disease, and approximately 25% of patients have a familial component. High-penetrance singlegene germline mutations conferring a true hereditary susceptibility account for around 5% to 6% of all cases. Lynch syndrome is the most common hereditary form of colorectal cancer. Much of the hereditary component in the remaining familial cases of CRC is likely polygenic, and many of the genetic changes involved are as yet unidentified. This article addresses the most clinically important CRC genetic syndromes.

Management of high-risk colonoscopy patients

Rapidly evolving knowledge of the pathogenesis and natural history of colorectal cancer (CRC), especially in high-risk groups, is allowing the development of new tools to identify those who will benefit most from preventive measures. Currently, screening for adenomas, dysplasia, and early-stage invasive cancers provides the best opportunity to prevent and improve survival from CRC. Screening of high-risk groups almost always includes colonoscopy. This review discusses what represents quality colonoscopy. Proper risk stratification, understanding the natural history of each disease, proper patient counseling, and optimal techniques all help define quality colonoscopy in high-risk groups.

Lessons from Lynch syndrome: a tumor biology-based approach to familial colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) develops within precursor lesions in the single-celled epithelial lining of the gut. The two most common epithelial lesions are the adenoma and the serrated polyp. CRC is also one of the most familial of the common cancers, and just as there are syndromes associated with increased risk of CRC arising in adenomas, there are also syndromes with increased CRC risk associated with serrated polyps. In this article, we describe the features of such a syndrome, familial serrated neoplasia, which distinguish it from the well-characterized condition Lynch syndrome (or hereditary nonpolyposis CRC), and show that the molecular pathology of tumors forms the basis for this distinction. Lynch syndrome CRC arises almost exclusively within adenomatous precursor lesions, in contrast with familial serrated neoplasia where at least half of the cancers develop in serrated polyps. Finally, rare families exist in which both conditions segregate independently, producing a difficult diagnostic picture.

Application of molecular diagnostics for the detection of Lynch syndrome

Lynch syndrome (LS), or hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer, is the most common hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) syndrome, accounting for approximately 2-5% of all newly diagnosed cases of CRC. Patients with LS have an increased lifetime risk of colorectal (52.2% in women and 68.7% in men) and endometrial cancer (15-70%), as well as certain extra-colonic cancers. Germline mutations in one of several DNA mismatch repair genes underlie LS. Molecular testing has emerged as an indispensable strategy for the diagnosis of LS. The diagnostic work-up of at-risk individuals includes a careful family history evaluation, microsatellite instability, immunohistochemistry and germline DNA analysis. A positive test result can guide clinicians in formulating the appropriate screening, surveillance and management strategies. However, because of the absence of an overt phenotype, such as a diffuse polyposis, it is not always straightforward to recognize LS clinically.

Microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a hypermutable phenotype caused by the loss of DNA mismatch repair activity. MSI is detected in about 15% of all colorectal cancers; 3% are of these are associated with Lynch syndrome and the other 12% are caused by sporadic, acquired hypermethylation of the promoter of the MLH1 gene, which occurs in tumors with the CpG island methylator phenotype. Colorectal tumors with MSI have distinctive features, including a tendency to arise in the proximal colon, lymphocytic infiltrate, and a poorly differentiated, mucinous or signet ring appearance. They have a slightly better prognosis than colorectal tumors without MSI and do not have the same response to chemotherapeutics. Discovery of MSI in colorectal tumors has increased awareness of the diversity of colorectal cancers and implications for specialized management of patients.

Aberrant DNA methylation in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer without mismatch repair deficiency

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Approximately half of the families that fulfill Amsterdam criteria for Lynch syndrome or hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) do not have evidence of the germline mismatch repair gene mutations that define this syndrome and result in microsatellite instability (MSI). The carcinogenic pathways and the best diagnostic approaches to detect microsatellite stable (MSS) HNPCC tumors are unclear. We investigated the contribution of epigenetic alterations to the development of MSS HNPCC tumors.

METHODS

Colorectal cancers were divided into 4 groups: (1) microsatellite stable, Amsterdam-positive (MSS HNPCC) (N = 22); (2) Lynch syndrome cancers (identified mismatch repair mutations) (N = 21); (3) sporadic MSS (N = 92); and (4) sporadic MSI (N = 46). Methylation status was evaluated for CACNAG1, SOCS1, RUNX3, NEUROG1, MLH1, and long interspersed nucleotide element-1 (LINE-1). KRAS and BRAF mutation status was analyzed.

RESULTS

MSS HNPCC tumors displayed a significantly lower degree of LINE-1 methylation, a marker for global methylation, than any other group. Although most MSS HNPCC tumors had some degree of CpG island methylation, none presented a high index of methylation. MSS HNPCC tumors had KRAS mutations exclusively in codon 12, but none harbored V600E BRAF mutations.

CONCLUSIONS

Tumors from Amsterdam-positive patients without mismatch repair deficiency (MSS HNPCC) have certain molecular features, including global hypomethylation, that distinguish them from all other colorectal cancers. These characteristics could have an important impact on tumor behavior or treatment response. Studies are underway to further assess the cause and effects of these features.

Colorectal cancer

Substantial progress has been made in colorectal cancer in the past decade. Screening, used to identify individuals at an early stage, has improved outcome. There is greater understanding of the genetic basis of inherited colorectal cancer and identification of patients at risk. Optimisation of surgery for patients with localised disease has had a major effect on survival at 5 years and 10 years. For rectal cancer, identification of patients at greatest risk of local failure is important in the selection of patients for preoperative chemoradiation, a strategy proven to improve outcomes in these patients. Stringent postoperative follow-up helps the early identification of potentially radically treatable oligometastatic disease and improves long-term survival. Treatment with adjuvant fluoropyrimidine for colon and rectal cancers further improves survival, more so in stage III than in stage II disease, and oxaliplatin-based combination chemotherapy is now routinely used for stage III disease, although efficacy must be carefully balanced against toxicity. In stage II disease, molecular markers such as microsatellite instability might help select patients for treatment. The integration of targeted treatments with conventional cytotoxic drugs has expanded the treatment of metastatic disease resulting in incremental survival gains. However, biomarker development is essential to aid selection of patients likely to respond to therapy, thereby rationalising treatments and improving outcomes.

Beyond genome-wide association studies: genetic heterogeneity and individual predisposition to cancer

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) using population-based designs have identified many genetic loci associated with risk of a range of complex diseases including cancer; however, each locus exerts a very small effect and most heritability remains unexplained. Family-based pedigree studies have also suggested tentative loci linked to increased cancer risk, often characterized by pedigree-specificity. However, comparison between the results of population- and family-based studies shows little concordance. Explanations for this unidentified genetic 'dark matter' of cancer include phenotype ascertainment issues, limited power, gene-gene and gene-environment interactions, population heterogeneity, parent-of-origin-specific effects, and rare and unexplored variants. Many of these reasons converge towards the concept of genetic heterogeneity that might implicate hundreds of genetic variants in regulating cancer risk. Dissecting the dark matter is a challenging task. Further insights can be gained from both population association and pedigree studies.

Aberrant gene promoter methylation associated with sporadic multiple colorectal cancer

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) multiplicity has been mainly related to polyposis and non-polyposis hereditary syndromes. In sporadic CRC, aberrant gene promoter methylation has been shown to play a key role in carcinogenesis, although little is known about its involvement in multiplicity. To assess the effect of methylation in tumor multiplicity in sporadic CRC, hypermethylation of key tumor suppressor genes was evaluated in patients with both multiple and solitary tumors, as a proof-of-concept of an underlying epigenetic defect.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We examined a total of 47 synchronous/metachronous primary CRC from 41 patients, and 41 gender, age (5-year intervals) and tumor location-paired patients with solitary tumors. Exclusion criteria were polyposis syndromes, Lynch syndrome and inflammatory bowel disease. DNA methylation at the promoter region of the MGMT, CDKN2A, SFRP1, TMEFF2, HS3ST2 (3OST2), RASSF1A and GATA4 genes was evaluated by quantitative methylation specific PCR in both tumor and corresponding normal appearing colorectal mucosa samples. Overall, patients with multiple lesions exhibited a higher degree of methylation in tumor samples than those with solitary tumors regarding all evaluated genes. After adjusting for age and gender, binomial logistic regression analysis identified methylation of MGMT2 (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.97; p = 0.008) and RASSF1A (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.01 to 4.13; p = 0.047) as variables independently associated with tumor multiplicity, being the risk related to methylation of any of these two genes 4.57 (95% CI, 1.53 to 13.61; p = 0.006). Moreover, in six patients in whom both tumors were available, we found a correlation in the methylation levels of MGMT2 (r = 0.64, p = 0.17), SFRP1 (r = 0.83, 0.06), HPP1 (r = 0.64, p = 0.17), 3OST2 (r = 0.83, p = 0.06) and GATA4 (r = 0.6, p = 0.24). Methylation in normal appearing colorectal mucosa from patients with multiple and solitary CRC showed no relevant difference in any evaluated gene.

Conclusions

These results provide a proof-of-concept that gene promoter methylation is associated with tumor multiplicity. This underlying epigenetic defect may have noteworthy implications in the prevention of patients with sporadic CRC.

Familial colorectal cancer type X: the other half of hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer syndrome

Establishing the Amsterdam criteria, based on pedigrees, was essential for defining hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) syndrome in such a way that the underlying genetic cause could be identified. It is now known that about half of families that fulfill the original Amsterdam criteria have a hereditary DNA mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutation. These families may be said to have Lynch syndrome. The other half of families with HNPCC has no evidence of DNA MMR deficiency, and studies show that these families are different from families with Lynch syndrome. Familial colorectal cancer type X is the name used to refer to the "other half of HNPCC".

Review of the Lynch syndrome: history, molecular genetics, screening, differential diagnosis, and medicolegal ramifications

More than one million patients will manifest colorectal cancer (CRC) this year of which, conservatively, approximately 3% (approximately 30,700 cases) will have Lynch syndrome (LS), the most common hereditary CRC predisposing syndrome. Each case belongs to a family with clinical needs that require genetic counseling, DNA testing for mismatch repair genes (most frequently MLH1 or MSH2) and screening for CRC. Colonoscopy is mandated, given CRC's proximal occurrence (70-80% proximal to the splenic flexure). Due to its early age of onset (average 45 years of age), colonoscopy needs to start by age 25, and because of its accelerated carcinogenesis, it should be repeated every 1 to 2 years through age 40 and then annually thereafter. Should CRC occur, subtotal colectomy may be necessary, given the marked frequency of synchronous and metachronous CRC. Because 40-60% of female patients will manifest endometrial cancer, tailored management is essential. Additional extracolonic cancers include ovary, stomach, small bowel, pancreas, hepatobiliary tract, upper uroepithelial tract, brain (Turcot variant) and sebaceous adenomas/carcinomas (Muir-Torre variant). LS explains only 10-25% of familial CRC.

Hereditary colorectal cancer: MYH-associated polyposis and other newly identified disorders

Historically, discussions of familial adenomatous polyposis and hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer have dominated lectures and writings on hereditary predisposition to colorectal cancer. In the last decade, the subject has grown well beyond the two entities. In this paper, five topics relevant to genetic risk assessment for colorectal cancer are reviewed. These include the autosomal recessive MYH-associated polyposis, hyperplastic polyposis and serrated pathway syndrome, the association of autosomal dominant juvenile polyposis with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia, familial colorectal cancer type X, and the syndrome of biallelic DNA mismatch repair gene mutations. Knowledge of these entities may assist clinicians to recognize and manage cases that do not fit into the more common syndromes of colorectal cancer predisposition.

A prospective, multicenter, population-based study of BRAF mutational analysis for Lynch syndrome screening

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Mismatch repair (MMR) deficiencies are the hallmark of tumors arising in Lynch syndrome, however, in approximately 15% of sporadic colorectal cancers (CRC) these deficiencies most often are associated with somatic methylation of the MMR gene MLH1. Recently, an oncogenic mutation in the BRAF gene has been involved in sporadic CRC showing MMR deficiencies as a result of MLH1 promoter methylation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the contribution of BRAF V600E mutation analysis in the identification of MSH2/MLH1 gene mutation carriers in newly diagnosed CRC patients.

METHODS

BRAF V600E mutation was analyzed in CRC patients with MMR deficiencies (microsatellite instability and/or lack of MLH1/MSH2 protein expression) in the EPICOLON population-based study. The effectiveness and efficiency of different strategies were evaluated with respect to the presence of MSH2/MLH1 germline mutations.

RESULTS

MMR deficiencies were detected in 119 of the 1222 CRC patients with tumors showing either microsatellite instability (n = 111) or loss of protein expression (n = 81). BRAF mutation was detected in 22 (18.5%) of the patients. None of the patients with unambiguous germline mutation had BRAF mutation. Regardless of the strategy used to identify MSH2/MLH1 gene carriers, the introduction of BRAF analysis in these patients slightly improves their effectiveness. The introduction of BRAF mutation analysis as a step before germline genetic testing in patients with MMR deficiencies achieved a significant reduction in costs per mutation detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Detection of BRAF V600E mutation could simplify and improve the cost effectiveness of genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer, especially in patients whose family history is incomplete or unknown.

Validation and extension of the PREMM1,2 model in a population-based cohort of colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Early recognition of patients at risk for Lynch syndrome is critical but often difficult. Recently, a predictive algorithm-the PREMM(1,2) model-has been developed to quantify the risk of carrying a germline mutation in the mismatch repair (MMR) genes MLH1 and MSH2. However, the model's performance in an unselected, population-based colorectal cancer population as well as its performance in combination with tumor MMR testing are unknown.

METHODS

We included all colorectal cancer cases from the EPICOLON study, a prospective, multicenter, population-based cohort (n = 1222). All patients underwent tumor microsatellite instability analysis and immunostaining for MLH1 and MSH2, and those with MMR deficiency (n = 91) underwent tumor BRAF V600E mutation analysis and MLH1/MSH2 germline testing.

RESULTS

The PREMM(1,2) model with a >/=5% cut-off had a sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of 100%, 68%, and 2%, respectively. The use of a higher PREMM(1,2) cut-off provided a higher specificity and PPV, at expense of a lower sensitivity. The combination of a >/=5% cut-off with tumor MMR testing maintained 100% sensitivity with an increased specificity (97%) and PPV (21%). The PPV of a PREMM(1,2) score >/=20% alone (16%) approached the PPV obtained with PREMM(1,2) score >/=5% combined with tumor MMR testing. In addition, a PREMM(1,2) score of <5% was associated with a high likelihood of a BRAF V600E mutation.

CONCLUSIONS

The PREMM(1,2) model is useful to identify MLH1/MSH2 mutation carriers among unselected colorectal cancer patients. Quantitative assessment of the genetic risk might be useful to decide on subsequent tumor MMR and germline testing.

Identification and classification of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome): adapting old concepts to recent advancements. Report from the Italian Association for the study of Hereditary Colorectal Tumors Consensus Group

Knowledge about hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC)/Lynch syndrome clearly evolved during the last 10 to 15 years much more rapidly than in the past century. Consequently, long-established concepts and attitudes that held for many years should now be changed or updated. With regard to classification, we suggest maintaining the eponym "Lynch syndrome" for families that have a well-documented deficiency of the DNA mismatch repair system, whereas "clinical hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer" should be reserved for those families that meet the Amsterdam criteria but without evidence of mismatch repair impairment. Any family (or individual) meeting one or more of the Bethesda criteria can be considered as suspected HNPCC. For the identification of hereditary colorectal cancer molecular screening or the pedigree analysis show advantages and disadvantages; the ideal would be to combine the two approaches. Diffusion of the microsatellite instability test and of immunohistochemistry in the pathology laboratories might render in the immediate future molecular screening more realistic. Strict endoscopic surveillance of family members at risk (with first colonoscopy at age 20-25 years and then every 2-3 years) is needed only in families with documented alterations of the DNA mismatch repair. To a certain extent, our conclusions were similar to the recently proposed "European guidelines for the clinical management of HNPCC," although we prefer the term "clinical hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer," instead of familial colorectal cancer, for families meeting the Amsterdam criteria but not having evidence of mismatch repair impairment.

Clustering of Lynch syndrome malignancies with no evidence for a role of DNA mismatch repair

OBJECTIVES

We ascertained a large kindred with an excess of Lynch syndrome-associated cancers. Our objective was to determine if a defect in one of the DNA mismatch repair (DMMR) genes was the probable cause of cancer susceptibility as microsatellite instability (MSI) and immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis of the probands' tumors did not provide a clear indication.

METHODS

A detailed history and review of medical records was undertaken to construct a four-generation pedigree. Blood samples were obtained for analysis of germline DNA. Polymorphic repeats from the MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 loci were genotyped and the co-segregation of markers and disease was assessed. DMMR gene expression for all available tumors was evaluated by IHC. Combined bisulfite restriction analysis (COBRA) of MLH1 was utilized to test for germline epimutation.

RESULTS

Four gynecologic carcinomas, 3 colon carcinomas, and 13 cases of adenomatous polyps were identified. The family met Amsterdam II criteria. The mean age of cancer diagnosis in the kindred was 63 years (range 44-82 years). DNA marker analyses excluded linkage to MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2. Furthermore, MSI and IHC analysis of tumors did not suggest a role for DMMR. Methylation of the MLH1 promoter was identified in the peripheral blood leukocytes (PBLs) of a family member with an early onset colon cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a large family with multiple Lynch malignancies and no evidence for an inherited defect in DMMR. This family represents an important but poorly understood form of autosomal dominant inherited cancer susceptibility. Aberrant MLH1 promoter methylation in normal tissues may be a marker for cancer susceptibility in families such as this.

Familial colorectal cancer syndrome X

In recent decades there have been significant advances in our understanding of the genes that underlie hereditary susceptibility to colorectal cancer (CRC). In 2007 it is well established that mutations in DNA repair genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, MYH) and Wnt pathway signal transduction inhibitors (APC) underlie a significant percentage of hereditary CRC susceptibility. However, it also is clear that the known CRC susceptibility genes do not explain fully the inherited risk seen even in families meeting the revised Bethesda guidelines. Furthermore, the optimal medical management of these syndromes is still being defined. What underlies CRC susceptibility in these highly unusual families that do not have identifiable mutations in the known genes, often referred to as syndrome X? This review addresses this important question that is relevant to our current understanding of the management of individuals with hereditary predisposition to CRC.

Molecular Analysis of Colorectal Cancer Tumors from Patients with Mismatch Repair–Proficient Hereditary Nonpolyposis Colorectal Cancer Suggests Novel Carcinogenic Pathways

PURPOSE

A subset of colorectal cancers (CRC) arises in families that, despite fulfilling clinical criteria for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC), do not show evidence of a mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency. The main objective of this study was to characterize these tumors at the molecular level.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

After comprehensive germ line mutation scanning, microsatellite analysis, and MMR protein expressions, we selected a well-defined cohort of 57 colorectal tumors with no evidence of MMR defects. In this group of tumors, we analyzed KRAS, BRAF, and APC somatic mutations, as well as methylguanine methyltransferase (MGMT) and beta-catenin expression. We correlated these alterations with clinicopathologic data and explored the relationship between KRAS G > A transitions and lack of MGMT expression.

RESULTS

The mutation profile at the RAS/RAF/MAPK pathway mimics sporadic microsatellite-stable CRCs. We found an average age of diagnosis 10 years older in KRAS-mutated patients (P = 0.001). In addition, we show that KRAS G > A transitions are actively selected by tumors, regardless of MGMT status. Similarities with HNPCC high-microsatellite instability tumors are observed when APC data are analyzed. The APC mutation rate was low and small insertions/deletions accounted for 70% of the alterations. In addition, we found a low frequency of beta-catenin nuclear staining. Finally, we did not find evidence of tumors arising in individuals from the same family sharing molecular features.

CONCLUSIONS

We show evidence that CRC tumors arising in HNPCC families without MMR alterations have distinctive molecular features. Overall, our work shows that systematic analysis of somatic alterations in a well-defined subset of CRCs is a good approach to provide new insights into the mechanisms of colorectal carcinogenesis.

Who should be sent for genetic testing in hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes?

Genetic testing is being adopted increasingly to identify individuals with germline mutations that predispose to hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes. Deciding who to test and for which syndrome is of concern to members of the GI oncology community, molecular geneticists, and genetic counselors. The purpose of this review is to help provide guidelines for testing, given that the results influence syndrome diagnosis and clinical management. Although family history may determine whether testing is appropriate and may direct testing to the most informative family member, evolving clinicopathologic features can identify individual patients who warrant testing. Thus, although the usual absence of clinical premonitory signs in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (or Lynch syndrome) adds difficulty to its diagnosis, use of the Amsterdam Criteria and Bethesda Guidelines can prove helpful. In contrast, premonitory stigmata such as pigmentations in Peutz-Jeghers syndrome and the phenotypic features of familial adenomatous polyposis aid significantly in syndrome diagnosis. We conclude that the physician's role in advising DNA testing is no small matter, given that a hereditary cancer syndrome's sequelae may be far reaching. Genetic counselors may be extremely helpful to the practicing gastroenterologist, oncologist, or surgeon; when more specialized knowledge is called for, referral can be made to a medical geneticist and/or a medical genetics clinic.

Detection of metachronous neoplasms in colorectal cancer patients: identification of risk factors

PURPOSE

Patients with colorectal cancer have a high risk of developing metachronous neoplasms. Identification of predictive factors associated with such conditions would allow individualized follow-up strategies in these patients. This study was designed to identify individual and familial factors associated with the development of metachronous colorectal neoplasms in patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODS

In the context of a prospective, multicenter, general population-based study-the EPICOLON project-all patients with colorectal cancer attended in ten Spanish hospitals during a one-year period were included. Patients with familial adenomatous polyposis or inflammatory bowel disease were excluded. All patients were monitored by colonoscopy within two years of the diagnoses. Demographic, clinical, pathologic, molecular (microsatellite instability status and immunohistochemistry for MSH2 and MLH1), and familial characteristics (fulfillment of Amsterdam I or II criteria, and revised Bethesda guidelines) were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 353 patients were included in the study. At two years of follow-up, colonoscopy revealed the presence of adenomas in 89 (25 percent) patients and colorectal cancer in 14 (3.9 percent) patients, in 7 cases restricted to anastomosis. Univariate analysis demonstrated that development of metachronous neoplasm (adenoma or colorectal cancer) was associated with personal history of previous colorectal cancer (odds ratio, 5.58; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.01-31.01), and presence of previous or synchronous adenomas (odds ratio, 1.77; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.21-3.17). Although nonstatistical significance was achieved, metachronisms were associated with gender (P<0.09) and differentiation degree (P<0.08). Multivariate analysis identified previous or synchronous adenomas (odds ratio, 1.98; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.16-3.38) as independent predictive factor. Neither presence of tumor DNA microsatellite instability nor family history correlated with the presence of metachronous neoplasms.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with previous or synchronous colorectal adenoma have an increased risk of developing metachronous colorectal neoplasms. Accordingly, this subgroup of patients may benefit from specific surveillance strategies.

The case for a genetic predisposition to serrated neoplasia in the colorectum: hypothesis and review of the literature

In recent years, an alternative pathway of colorectal cancer development has been described in which serrated polyps replace the traditional adenoma as the precursor lesion. Importantly, serrated polyps and a subset of colorectal cancer show largely nonoverlapping mutation profiles to those found in adenomas and the majority of colorectal cancer. These genetic alterations include activating mutation of the BRAF proto-oncogene and widespread gene promoter hypermethylation (CpG island methylator phenotype or CIMP). Up to 15% of colorectal cancer is likely to develop on the basis of a strong genetic predisposition. The two most well-characterized syndromes, familial adenomatous polyposis and hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome), both develop via the adenoma-carcinoma pathway and together account for approximately one third of familial colorectal cancer. We have recently described 11 families in which there is evidence that the genetic predisposition to autosomal dominant colorectal cancer is linked to the serrated pathway. This condition, serrated pathway syndrome, and the related condition, hyperplastic polyposis, the presentation of which suggests a recessive mode of inheritance, represent two syndromes in which BRAF mutation and methylation co-occur within serrated precursor lesions. Further, CIMP is observed in the normal colonic mucosa of individuals with hyperplastic polyposis consistent with a field defect in epigenetic regulation. The spectrum of serrated neoplasia may also implicate the apparently sporadic and later onset subset of colorectal cancer with high levels of microsatellite instability. The tendency for these lesions to be multiple, associated with smoking, and to show frequent BRAF mutation and CIMP points to a defect that may result from interactions between the environment and a weakly penetrant genetic alteration.

Performance of different microsatellite marker panels for detection of mismatch repair-deficient colorectal tumors

BACKGROUND

Colorectal tumors caused by failure of the DNA mismatch repair system commonly show microsatellite instability. Our goals were to compare the performance of two panels of markers (a panel previously recommended by the National Cancer Institute [NCI] and a pentaplex of mononucleotide repeats) and to devise the simplest diagnostic strategy for identification of patients with colorectal cancer characterized by defects in mismatch repair.

METHODS

We recruited 1058 patients who were newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer. DNA from fresh-frozen and paraffin-embedded tumors was tested for microsatellite instability, using the NCI-recommended panel of microsatellite markers and the pentaplex panel of mononucleotide repeats, respectively, as templates for polymerase chain reactions (PCRs). Microsatellite instability in fresh-frozen tumors was also assessed using the pentaplex panel of mononucleotides in a crossover analysis. The expression of mismatch repair proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2) in the tumors was determined immunohistochemically. The sensitivity and specificity with which the marker panels identified tumors with deficiencies in the expression of mismatch repair proteins were calculated. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

The sensitivity and positive predictive value of the NCI panel were 76.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 61% to 92%) and 65.0% (95% CI = 49% to 81%), respectively; corresponding values for the mononucleotide pentaplex panel were 95.8% (95% CI = 89% to 103%) and 88.5% (95% CI = 79% to 98%), respectively. A panel consisting of the mononucleotide repeat markers BAT26 and NR24 alone had the same predictive value as the pentaplex panel of mononucleotide repeats.

CONCLUSIONS

The pentaplex panel of mononucleotide repeats performs better than the NCI panel for the detection of mismatch repair-deficient tumors. Simultaneous assessment of the instability of BAT26 and NR24 is as effective as use of the pentaplex panel for diagnosing mismatch repair deficiency.

Clinicopathologic and pedigree differences in amsterdam I-positive hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer families according to tumor microsatellite instability status

PURPOSE

To establish the clinicopathologic and familial differences within Amsterdam I-positive families, showing either tumor microsatellite instability (MSI) or microsatellite stability (MSS) in order to confirm or deny the existence of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) without defects in the mismatch repair system.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty-four Amsterdam I-positive families were included in the study for which full, three-generation, family medical histories and colorectal paraffin-embedded tumors were obtained. Both personal and clinicopathologic information of patients were collected. In all cases, both the MSI status and the mismatch repair (MMR) protein expression were analyzed. MMR genetic testing was performed on the MSI families.

RESULTS

Of the Amsterdam I-positive families, 59.4% were tumor MSI, and 40.6% were tumor MSS. When comparing both groups, the statistical differences were observed in the age of onset (MSI, 41 years; MSS, 53 years); in the colorectal tumor location, more frequently proximal in MSI cases; in fewer mucinous tumors in MSS; and loss of MMR protein expression in the MSI tumors. Regarding the individual and familial cancer history, we observed a predominance of individuals with multiple primary tumors in MSI pedigrees, as well as differences in the type of tumors developed within the family.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support the suspicion of another hereditary colorectal syndrome different from HNPCC and characterized by MSS, the normal MMR immunohistochemical expression, the presence of only colorectal tumors, and the absence of individuals with multiple primary tumors. All these circumstances suggest the existence of a non-MMR gene being responsible for this new syndrome.

[Implantation of a hospital registry of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer]

INTRODUCTION

Identification of patients with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) can allow colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention through colonoscopy and polypectomies. The purpose of this study was to report the clinical characteristics of HNPCC families in our registry.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

HNPCC was identified using the Amsterdam criteria. Familial clustering of CRC and extracolonic cancers were investigated in families. Individuals at risk were offered annual colonoscopy, starting from the age of 25 years.

RESULTS

Twelve HNPCC families were identified. There were 46 cases of CRC in 38 patients. The mean age at diagnosis of CRC was 45.4 +/- 12.7 years (range 25-73 years). In patients with documented disease, right-sided tumors predominated. Eleven patients with extracolonic cancer were identified (six tumors located in the endometrium). Of 43 at-risk individuals, 29 accepted surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data confirm the importance of the family history in identifying HNPCC. This study confirms previously described characteristics in HNPCC, namely, early age at onset of CRC, right-sided predominance, multiple synchronous and metachronous neoplasms, and increased extracolonic cancers. This is the first study of clinical data in a Spanish HNPCC registry.

Hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: The rise and fall of a confusing term

The term Hereditary Non-Polyposis Colorectal Cancer (HNPCC) is a poor descriptor of the syndrome described by Lynch. Over the last decade, the term has been applied to heterogeneous groups of families meeting limited clinical criteria, for example the Amsterdam criteria. It is now apparent that not all Amsterdam criteria-positive families have the Lynch syndrome. The term HNPCC has also been applied to clinical scenarios in which CRCs with DNA microsatellite instability are diagnosed but in which there is no vertical transmission of an altered DNA mismatch repair (MMR) gene. A term that has multiple, mutually incompatible meanings is highly problematic, particularly when it may influence the management of an individual family. The Lynch syndrome is best understood as a hereditary predisposition to malignancy that is explained by a germline mutation in a DNA MMR gene. The diagnosis does not depend in an absolute sense on any particular family pedigree structure or age of onset of malignancy. Families with a strong family history of colorectal cancer that do not have Lynch syndrome have been grouped as ‘Familial Colorectal Cancer Type-X’. The first step in characterizing these cancer families is to distinguish them from Lynch syndrome. The term HNPCC no longer serves any useful purpose and should be phased out.

Clinical performance of original and revised Bethesda guidelines for the identification of MSH2/MLH1 gene carriers in patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer: proposal of a new and simpler set of recommendations

Identification of individuals who should undergo hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) genetic testing is a critical and difficult issue. For this purpose, the National Cancer Institute outlined a set of recommendations, the Bethesda guidelines, which have recently been revised.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical performance of original and revised Bethesda guidelines for the detection of MSH2/MLH1 gene carriers in patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A total of 1,222 patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer were included in the EPICOLON study, a prospective, multicenter, nationwide epidemiology survey aimed at establishing the incidence of HNPCC in Spain (JAMA 2005; 293:1986-1994). Performance characteristics of the original and revised Bethesda guidelines were assessed with respect to the presence of MSH2/MLH1 germline mutations. Logistic regression analysis was performed to establish the most effective strategy.

RESULTS

Original or revised Bethesda guidelines were equivalent strategies in terms of sensitivity (100%vs 100%; ns), specificity (98.1%vs 97.9%; ns), and overall accuracy (98.1%vs 97.9%; ns), as well as positive (25.8%vs 24.2%) and negative predictive values (100%vs 100%). The most discriminating individual variables were criteria number 1 (i.e., fulfillment of the Amsterdam criteria; RR = 34.14; 95% CI = 6.85-170.16; p < 0.001) and number 2 (i.e., individuals with two HNPCC-related neoplasms; RR = 35.63; 95% CI = 4.83-262.6; p < 0.001) of the original guidelines, and criterion number 1 of the revised guidelines (i.e., colorectal cancer diagnosed under 50 yr of age; RR = 29.34; 95% CI = 3.81-225.96; p= 0.001). The aggregation of these three criteria was equivalent to both Bethesda guidelines in terms of sensitivity (100%) and negative predictive value (100%), but superior to the revised criteria regarding specificity (98.5%; p < 0.05), overall accuracy (98.5%; p < 0.05), and positive predictive value (30.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Original and revised Bethesda guidelines are equivalent, highly effective criteria for the identification of MSH2/MLH1 gene mutation carriers in patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer. A new set of recommendations, based on a combination of some of their individual criteria, may provide additional advantages in terms of effectiveness.