Improvement of endometrial biopsy over transvaginal ultrasound alone for endometrial surveillance in women with Lynch syndrome. Fam Cancer. 2009;8:391-397. [PMID: 19504173 PMCID: PMC2771130 DOI: 10.1007/s10689-009-9252-x]

The Current State-or Lack Thereof-of Screening and Prevention for Gynecologic Malignancies for Patients With Lynch Syndrome

Lynch syndrome (LS) is an autosomal dominant genetic disorder that results in an increased risk of ovarian and endometrial cancers. The aim of this paper was to explore the management of this risk through screening and prevention. Published materials and evidence were explored and summarized. This paper demonstrated that while there has been increased awareness and advances in the identification and diagnosis of patients with LS, recommendations for screening and prevention remain less evidence-based. In decisions of management of patients with LS, a shared decision-making model should be used considering individual patient goals.

A new subtype of Lynch syndrome associated with MSH2 c.354T>A (p. Y118*) identified in a Chinese family: case report and literature review

Background

Lynch syndrome (LS) is an autosomal dominant inherited disorder caused by mutations in mismatch repair genes. Genetic counseling is crucial for the prevention and treatment of LS, as individuals with these mutations have an increased lifetime risk of developing multiple cancers. MutS Homolog 2 (MSH2) is a protein-coding gene that plays a key role in LS. A significant number of LS cases are linked to harmful heterozygous mutations in the MSH2 gene.

Case Presentation

The proband was a 50-year-old endometrial dedifferentiated carcinoma patient with a dMMR/MSI-H tumor negative for MSH2/MSH6 expression by immunohistochemistry. Genetic counseling and tumor gene testing were conducted using next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology, which revealed a previously unknown germline MSH2 gene nonsense mutation NM_000251.2:exon2.354T>A (p.Y118*), leading to a diagnosis of LS. Further analysis of this variant in five family members of the patient confirmed its presence in all individuals, with one family member being diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) at the age of 43. The proband received postoperative chemoradiotherapy and achieved a disease-free survival of 2 years, with ongoing follow-up.

Conclusion

This study provides evidence that the MSH2 nonsense mutation c.354T>A is a highly likely pathogenic mutation and is responsible for typical LS-associated endometrial carcinoma. It emphasizes the importance of genetic counseling for proband family members to facilitate early diagnosis of LS-related carcinoma.

Gynaecological cancer surveillance for women with Lynch syndrome: systematic review and cost-effectiveness evaluation

Background

Lynch syndrome is an inherited condition which leads to an increased risk of colorectal, endometrial and ovarian cancer. Risk-reducing surgery is generally recommended to manage the risk of gynaecological cancer once childbearing is completed. The value of gynaecological colonoscopic surveillance as an interim measure or instead of risk-reducing surgery is uncertain. We aimed to determine whether gynaecological surveillance was effective and cost-effective in Lynch syndrome.

Methods

We conducted systematic reviews of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of gynaecological cancer surveillance in Lynch syndrome, as well as a systematic review of health utility values relating to cancer and gynaecological risk reduction. Study identification included bibliographic database searching and citation chasing (searches updated 3 August 2021). Screening and assessment of eligibility for inclusion were conducted by independent researchers. Outcomes were prespecified and were informed by clinical experts and patient involvement. Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted and results were synthesised narratively. We also developed a whole-disease economic model for Lynch syndrome using discrete event simulation methodology, including natural history components for colorectal, endometrial and ovarian cancer, and we used this model to conduct a cost-utility analysis of gynaecological risk management strategies, including surveillance, risk-reducing surgery and doing nothing.

Results

We found 30 studies in the review of clinical effectiveness, of which 20 were non-comparative (single-arm) studies. There were no high-quality studies providing precise outcome estimates at low risk of bias. There is some evidence that mortality rate is higher for surveillance than for risk-reducing surgery but mortality is also higher for no surveillance than for surveillance. Some asymptomatic cancers were detected through surveillance but some cancers were also missed. There was a wide range of pain experiences, including some individuals feeling no pain and some feeling severe pain. The use of pain relief (e.g. ibuprofen) was common, and some women underwent general anaesthetic for surveillance. Existing economic evaluations clearly found that risk-reducing surgery leads to the best lifetime health (measured using quality-adjusted life-years) and is cost-effective, while surveillance is not cost-effective in comparison. Our economic evaluation found that a strategy of surveillance alone or offering surveillance and risk-reducing surgery was cost-effective, except for path_PMS2 Lynch syndrome. Offering only risk-reducing surgery was less effective than offering surveillance with or without surgery.

Limitations

Firm conclusions about clinical effectiveness could not be reached because of the lack of high-quality research. We did not assume that women would immediately take up risk-reducing surgery if offered, and it is possible that risk-reducing surgery would be more effective and cost-effective if it was taken up when offered.

Conclusions

There is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against gynaecological cancer surveillance in Lynch syndrome on clinical grounds, but modelling suggests that surveillance could be cost-effective. Further research is needed but it must be rigorously designed and well reported to be of benefit.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020171098.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR129713) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 41. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Yield of annual endometrial cancer surveillance in women with PTEN Hamartoma Tumor Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Expert-opinion based guidelines state that endometrial cancer surveillance (ECS) might be considered for patients with PTEN Hamartoma Tumor Syndrome (PHTS) based on an elevated lifetime risk of endometrial cancer. We aimed to evaluate the yield of ECS by annual transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) and endometrial biopsy (EMB) in PHTS patients.

METHODS

PHTS patients who visited our PHTS expert center between August 2012 and September 2020 and opted for annual ECS were included. Data on surveillance visits, diagnostics, reports of abnormal uterine bleeding and pathology results were retrospectively gathered and analyzed.

RESULTS

Surveillance was initiated in 25 women with a total of 93 gynecological surveillance visits during 76 surveillance years. The median age at first visit was 39 years (range 31-60) with a median follow-up duration of 38 months (range 6-96). Hyperplasia with and without atypia was detected six and three times, respectively, in seven (28%) women. The median age at hyperplasia detection was 40 years (range 31-50). In six asymptomatic women hyperplasia was detected during annual surveillance visits, while in one patient hyperplasia with atypia was detected during an additional visit due to abnormal uterine bleeding. In seven out of nine hyperplasias detected with EMB, TVUS beforehand showed no abnormalities. No (interval) carcinomas occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

ECS in women with PHTS enables detection of a substantial number of asymptomatic premalignancies, such as hyperplasia with and without atypia, suggesting that ECS may be beneficial with regard to cancer prevention. The addition of EMB to TVUS likely improves the detection of premalignancies.

Updates in gynecologic care for individuals with lynch syndrome

Lynch syndrome is an autosomal dominant hereditary cancer syndrome caused by germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in DNA mismatch repair genes (MLH1, MSH2, PMS2, MSH6) or the EPCAM gene. It is estimated to affect 1 in 300 individuals and confers a lifetime risk of cancer of 10-90%, depending on the specific variant and type of cancer. Lynch syndrome is the most common cause of inherited colorectal cancer, but for women, endometrial cancer is more likely to be the sentinel cancer. There is also evidence that certain PVs causing Lynch syndrome confer an increased risk of ovarian cancer, while the risk of ovarian cancer in others is not well defined. Given this, it is essential for the practicing gynecologist and gynecologic oncologist to remain up to date on the latest techniques in identification and diagnosis of individuals with Lynch syndrome as well as evidence-based screening and risk reduction recommendations for those impacted. Furthermore, as the landscape of gynecologic cancer treatment shifts towards treatment based on molecular classification of tumors, knowledge of targeted therapies well-suited for mismatch repair deficient Lynch tumors will be crucial. The objective of this review is to highlight recent updates in the literature regarding identification and management of individuals with Lynch syndrome as it pertains to endometrial and ovarian cancers to allow gynecologic providers the opportunity to both prevent and identify Lynch-associated cancers earlier, thereby reducing the morbidity and mortality of the syndrome.

Endometrial Hyperplasia

The objectives of this Clinical Expert Series on endometrial hyperplasia are to review the etiology and risk factors, histologic classification and subtypes, malignant progression risks, prevention options, and to outline both surgical and nonsurgical treatment options. Abnormal uterine and postmenopausal bleeding remain the hallmark of endometrial pathology, and up to 10-20% of postmenopausal bleeding will be either hyperplasia or cancer; thus, immediate evaluation of any abnormal bleeding with either tissue procurement for pathology or imaging should be undertaken. Although anyone with a uterus may develop atypical hyperplasia, also known as endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN), genetic predispositions (eg, Lynch syndrome), obesity, chronic anovulation, and polycystic ovarian syndrome all markedly increase these risks, whereas use of oral contraceptive pills or progesterone-containing intrauterine devices will decrease the risk. An EIN diagnosis carries a high risk of concomitant endometrial cancer or eventual progression to cancer in the absence of treatment. The definitive and curative treatment for EIN remains hysterectomy; however, the obesity epidemic, the potential desire for fertility-sparing treatments, the recognition of varying rates of malignant transformation, medical comorbidities, and an aging population all may factor into decisions to employ nonsurgical treatment modalities.

Screening and risk reducing surgery for endometrial or ovarian cancers in Lynch syndrome: a systematic review

Objective

Lynch syndrome is a hereditary cancer syndrome caused by mismatch repair gene mutations, and female carriers are at an increased risk of endometrial and ovarian cancer. The best approach to screening is not yet clear and practice varies across countries and centers. We aimed to provide evidence to inform the best approach to screening and risk reduction.

Methods

A systematic search of the literature was conducted (Medline, Embase, PubMed). Studies evaluating the following were included: women with Lynch syndrome (by mismatch repair mutation or Amsterdam II criteria), screening methods for endometrial and/or ovarian cancer, intervention included endometrial biopsy, transvaginal ultrasound, or serum cancer antigen 125 (CA-125), outcomes evaluated were number of cancers and/or endometrial hyperplasia.

Results

A total of 18 studies of Lynch syndrome carriers which screened for endometrial cancer using transvaginal ultrasound and/or hysteroscopy/endometrial biopsy revealed an incidence of 3.9% at the time of screening. Most (64.1%) endometrial cancers detected were from screening, with the balance detected in symptomatic women at the first screening visits, regular review, or between screening intervals. In mismatch repair carriers, the overall sensitivity of endometrial screening was 66.7%, and the number needed to screen ranged between 4 and 38 (median 7). The sensitivity of endometrial biopsy was 57.1% and the number needed to screen was 23–380 (median 78). The sensitivity of transvaginal ultrasound was 34.4% and the number needed to screen was 35–973 (median 170). Fourteen studies which screened for ovarian cancer using transvaginal ultrasound and/or CA-125 revealed an incidence of 1.3% at the time of screening and 42.9% of ovarian cancers were detected at asymptomatic screening. The sensitivity of ovarian screening was 54.6%, and the number needed to screen was 9–191 (median 23) in mismatch repair carriers. Thirteen studies reported 5.8% incident endometrial cancers and 0.5% ovarian cancers at time of risk reducing surgery.

Conclusions

There is limited evidence to support screening for endometrial and ovarian cancer in Lynch syndrome and data on mortality reduction are not available. Further prospective, randomized trials comparing targeted screening methods are needed. Risk reducing surgery remains the most reliable way to reduce endometrial and ovarian cancer risk in Lynch syndrome.

Endometrial cancer in Lynch syndrome

Lynch syndrome (LS) is an autosomal dominant inherited disease caused by germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in mismatch repair (MMR) genes. LS-associated endometrial cancer (LS-EC) is the most common extraintestinal sentinel cancer caused by germline PVs in MMR genes, including MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2. The clinicopathologic features of LS-EC include early age of onset, lower body mass index (BMI), endometrioid carcinoma and lower uterine segment involvement. There has been significant progress in screening, diagnosis, surveillance, prevention and treatment of LS-EC. Many studies support universal screening for LS among patients with EC. Screening mainly involves a combination of traditional clinical criteria and molecular techniques, including MMR-immunohistochemistry (MMR-IHC), microsatellite instability (MSI) testing, MLH1 promoter methylation testing and gene sequencing. The effectiveness of endometrial biopsy and transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) for clinical monitoring of asymptomatic women with LS are uncertain yet. Preventive strategies include hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) as well as chemoprophylaxis using exogenous progestin or aspirin. Recent research has revealed the benefits of immunotherapy for LS-EC. The NCCN guidelines recommend pembrolizumab and nivolumab for treating patients with advanced or recurrent microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) EC.

Identification of Novel Pathogenic Sequence Variants of the Mismatch Repair Genes During Screening for Lynch Syndrome in a Single Centre of Eastern Hungary

Introduction

Lynch syndrome is an autosomal dominant disorder, most frequent leading to colon cancer. Identification of patients with Lynch syndrome and screening of their family members are available prevention approach that can significantly decrease mortality. Unfortunately, routine screening still does not belong to standard of care in Hungary. In this study, we performed a comprehensive screening in order to identify patients with mismatch repair (MMR) mutation between the years of 2011 and 2014. Identified mutations were compared with those already published in the international databases.

Patients and Methods

Patients who underwent treatment for colorectal cancer at the Surgical Institute of the University of Debrecen were screened using the modified Amsterdam and Bethesda Criteria. Immunohistochemistry and microsatellite analyses were performed in order to identify possible mutation carrier cases. Suspicious cases underwent DNA sequencing to detect mutations in the mismatch repair genes (hMLH1, hMSH2).

Results

All together 760 colorectal cancer patients were screened. A total of 28 patients were identified as possible MMR mutation carrier and underwent further genetic evaluation. Pathogenic sequence variants of the MMR gene were found in 5 patients. Hypermethylation of the promoter region of the hMLH1 gene was identified in 2 patients. Two out of the 5 pathogenic sequence variants of the MMR gene were first identified by our group while other 2 mutations were previously published as possible founder mutations.

Conclusion

Identification of families with Lynch syndrome, while challenging because of variable phenotypes at diagnosis, is feasible with available molecular biological technologies and crucial to reduce mortality caused by this syndrome.

Gynecological Surveillance and Surgery Outcomes in Dutch Lynch Syndrome Carriers

Simple Summary

Female Lynch syndrome (LS) carriers have an increased risk to develop endometrial and ovarian cancer. In the Netherlands, carriers are therefore advised annual gynecological surveillance and eventually, risk-reducing surgery. Global gynecological LS surveillance guidelines are scarce and based on limited evidence. These are, however, warranted to offer accurate surveillance. To provide more insight into surveillance outcomes, this study assessed outcomes of gynecological surveillance and risk-reducing surgery in 164 LS carriers diagnosed in our center, with a median follow-up of 5.6 years per carrier. Although most surveillance visits happened within an advised timeframe, we observed large variability in how gynecological surveillance visits were performed. This finding stresses the need for development of clear and evidence-based guidelines. Endometrial cancers identified at surveillance were all found in early stage, mostly symptomatic, questioning surveillance benefit. Large, prospective studies should assess to what extent current LS surveillance programs contribute to early detection of gynecological tumors.

Abstract

Lynch syndrome (LS) is caused by pathogenic germline variants in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes, predisposing female carriers for endometrial cancer (EC) and ovarian cancer (OC). Since gynecological LS surveillance guidelines are based on little evidence, we assessed its outcomes. Data regarding gynecological tumors, surveillance, and (risk-reducing) surgery were collected from female LS carriers diagnosed in our center since 1993. Of 505 female carriers, 104 had a gynecological malignancy prior to genetic LS diagnosis. Of 264 carriers eligible for gynecological management, 164 carriers gave informed consent and had available surveillance data: 38 MLH1, 25 MSH2, 82 MSH6, and 19 PMS2 carriers (median follow-up 5.6 years). Surveillance intervals were within advised time in >80%. Transvaginal ultrasound, endometrial sampling, and CA125 measurements were performed in 76.8%, 35.9%, and 40.6%, respectively. Four symptomatic ECs, one symptomatic OC, and one asymptomatic EC were diagnosed. Endometrial hyperplasia was found in eight carriers, of whom three were symptomatic. Risk-reducing surgery was performed in 73 (45.5%) carriers (median age 51 years), revealing two asymptomatic ECs. All ECs were diagnosed in FIGO I. Gynecological management in LS carriers varied largely, stressing the need for uniform, evidence-based guidelines. Most ECs presented early and symptomatically, questioning the surveillance benefit in its current form.

Discovery of an endometrioid cancer lymph node metastasis without primary tumor in a context of Lynch syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Lynch syndrome is a hereditary predisposition to cancers, including colo-rectal and endometrial cancers in women. Prophylactic surgery including hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy is recommended once the parental project is completed in case of identified mutation.

CASE PRESENTATION

We describe the case of a 50-year-old patient with Lynch syndrome and identified MSH6 mutation who underwent a prophylactic hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. A left large broad ligament lesion suggestive of a fibroma was intraoperatively discovered and removed. Pathological examination and immunohistochemical study showed a lymph node macro-metastasis of an endometrioid adenocarcinoma, without primary tumor.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

Lymph node metastasis can occur before endometrial cancer but the link with Lynch syndrome remains to be proved. Lymph node assessment by imaging before prophylactic surgery in Lynch syndrome could be considered.

Feasibility of endometrial sampling by vaginal tampons in women with Lynch syndrome

Background

Endometrial sampling for the surveillance of women with Lynch syndrome is an invasive and painful procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a less invasive procedure of collecting vital cells by vaginal tampons.

Methods

This was a prospective feasibility study of women scheduled to undergo annual gynecological surveillance, including endometrial sampling. We included consecutive asymptomatic women with Lynch syndrome or first-degree relatives and asked them to insert a vaginal tampon 2–4 h before attending their outpatient appointment. Feasibility was evaluated by the following metrics: patient acceptance, pain intensity of each procedure (assessed by visual analog scale; range 0–10), and the presence of vital cells obtained by tampon-based or endometrial sampling methods. Two pathologists independently evaluated all samples.

Results

In total, 25 of 32 approached women completed the tampon-based procedure, with 23 of these subsequently undergoing invasive endometrial sampling. The median visual analog scale scores for tampon use and invasive endometrial sampling were 0 (range, 0–10) and 5.5 (range, 1–10) (p < 0.001). None of the tampon samples analyzed by cytology showed endometrial cells, but they did contain vital squamous cells and granulocytes. By contrast, 18 (78%) of the invasive endometrial samples contained enough endometrial tissue for analysis. No endometrial abnormalities were found by endometrial sampling.

Conclusions

Tampon-based endometrial surveillance was a well-accepted and non-painful procedure, and although tampons contained vital cells, they did not provide endometrial cells. However, this study was limited to asymptomatic women with Lynch syndrome (no endometrial pathology), indicating that research is needed to evaluate whether the tampon method has any utility for endometrial surveillance in women with Lynch syndrome.

Genetic Counseling and Surveillance Focused on Lynch Syndrome

Lynch syndrome is a hereditary cancer syndrome caused by germline mutations in one of several DNA mismatch repair genes. Lynch syndrome leads to an increased lifetime risk of various cancers, particularly colorectal, and endometrial cancers. After identifying patients suspected of having Lynch syndrome by clinical criteria, computational prediction models, and/or universal tumor testing, genetic testing is performed to confirm the diagnosis. Before and after genetic testing, genetic counseling should be provided. Genetic counseling should involve a detailed personal and family history, information on the disorder and genetic tests, discussion of the management and surveillance of the disease, career plan, family plan, and psychosocial support. Surveillance of colorectal cancer and other malignancies is of paramount importance for properly managing Lynch syndrome. This review focuses on important considerations in genetic counseling and the latest insights into the surveillance of individuals and families with Lynch syndrome.

For Women, Lynch Syndrome Is About More than Colon Cancer

Lynch syndrome, also known as hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer, has historically been characterized by a predisposition to colorectal cancer; however, for women with Lynch syndrome, the risks for gynecologic cancers pose an equal or greater risk than colorectal cancer. In addition, the gynecologic cancer is often the first cancer that presents in these patients. Also of importance to women with Lynch syndrome is the efficacy of gynecologic cancer screening being significantly lower than colorectal cancer screening, leading to inconsistency in provider recommendations for gynecologic screening and surveillance. We had the chance to listen to women with Lynch syndrome, in their own words, discuss their health care experiences as they relate to gynecologic cancer risk, and identified several important themes. They describe feeling confused about their screening and surveillance options while also being heavily reliant on their health care providers for guidance. In addition, women with Lynch syndrome discuss attempting to balance medical management of Lynch syndrome with their reproductive choices. Finally, they believe that increased awareness by women and their providers about the gynecologic cancer risks associated with Lynch syndrome should be a higher priority. We view the words of these women as a call to action for Lynch syndrome patients, clinicians, researchers, and advocates.

[Prophylactic hysterectomy in Lynch syndrome: Feasibility and outcomes]

OBJECTIVES

Lynch syndrome (LS) is a hereditary predisposition to cancers, first of all, colo-rectal and endometrial cancers in women. Although recommended, gynecologic screening has never proven its benefit. Prophylactic surgery can be considered once the parental project is completed. There are few data regarding the assessment of prophylactic surgery. The objectives of our study were to evaluate the feasibility and morbidity of prophylactic hysterectomy in patients with Lynch syndrome.

METHODS

This is a descriptive retrospective study of consecutive patients with LS undergoing prophylactic hysterectomy at the Georges-Pompidou European Hospital from 2002 to 2016. We collected demographic characteristics, results of preoperative assessment, intra- and postoperative data, final pathologic result as well as postoperative follow-up data.

RESULTS

Forty patients were included in the study, and seventeen women had a history of colon cancer surgery. All hysterectomies were performed by laparoscopy, with two cases of laparoconversion. Two intraoperative complications occurred: serosal small bowel injuries and superficial bladder injury. Two early postoperative complications occurred (a peritonitis on small bowel perforation and a peritonitis on left ureteral injury) and two late complications (vesico-vaginal fistula and adhesive small bowel obstruction). All operative specimens were benign. With a median follow-up of 28 months [5-52], no patient had peritoneal cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that prophylactic hysterectomy in Lynch syndrome should be done with caution. Per and postoperative complication rates appear to be higher than in general population, probably related to a more frequent history of colorectal cancer. However, total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy appears to be an effective strategy for preventing gynecological cancers in women with the Lynch syndrome.

Hereditary Cancers in Gynecology: What Physicians Should Know About Genetic Testing, Screening, and Risk Reduction

Obstetrician gynecologists play a critical role in the identification of women who may carry a germline mutation placing them at an increased lifetime risk of gynecologic and nongynecologic cancers. Given this, all gynecologists must have a basic understanding of the most common hereditary cancer syndromes, the associated cancer risks, and possible risk-reducing interventions to play a proactive role in the care of these women. This article presents general guidelines and potential tools for identification of high-risk patients, reviews the current literature regarding genetic mutations associated with gynecologic malignancies, and proposes screening and risk-reduction options for high-risk patients.

Characteristics of Lynch syndrome associated ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

To describe clinical characteristics of Lynch syndrome associated ovarian cancer and the efficacy of surveillance in the early detection of these ovarian cancers.

METHODS

All Lynch syndrome associated ovarian cancer cases identified in either the Dutch Lynch syndrome registry (DLSR) between 1987 and 2016, and/or the cohort at the University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG) between 1993 and 2016 were included. Clinical data on age at diagnosis, mutation type, histological type, FIGO stage, treatment, follow-up and gynecological surveillance were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 46/798 (6%) women in the DLSR and 7/80 (9%) in the UMCG cohort were identified as LS associated ovarian cancer patients. The median age at ovarian cancer diagnosis was 46.0 years (range 20-75 years). The most frequently reported histological type was endometrioid adenocarcinoma (40%; n = 21) and serous carcinoma (36%; n = 19). Most tumors (87%; n = 46) were detected at an early stage (FIGO I/II). Forty-one of 53 (77%) patients were diagnosed with ovarian cancer before LS was diagnosed. In the other 12/53 (23%) women, ovarian cancer developed after starting annual gynecological surveillance for LS; three ovarian cancers were screen-detected in asymptomatic women. Overall survival was 83%.

CONCLUSION

Ovarian cancer in women with LS has a wide age-range of onset, is usually diagnosed at an early stage with predominantly endometrioid type histology and a good overall survival. The early stage at diagnosis could not be attributed to annual gynecological surveillance.

Current and future role of genetic screening in gynecologic malignancies

The world of hereditary cancers has seen exponential growth in recent years. While hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and Lynch syndrome account for the majority of mutations encountered by gynecologists, newly identified deleterious genetic mutations continue to be unearthed with their associated risks of malignancies. However, these advances in genetic cancer predispositions then force practitioners and their patients to confront the uncertainties of these less commonly identified mutations and the fact that there is limited evidence to guide them in expected cancer risk and appropriate risk-reduction strategies. Given the speed of information, it is imperative to involve cancer genetics experts when counseling these patients. In addition, coordination of screening and care in conjunction with specialty high-risk clinics, if available, allows for patients to have centralized management for multiple cancer risks under the guidance of physicians with experience counseling these patients. The objective of this review is to present the current literature regarding genetic mutations associated with gynecologic malignancies as well to propose screening and risk-reduction options for these high-risk patients.

European/U.S. Comparison and Contrasts in Ovarian Cancer Screening and Prevention in a High-Risk Population

The history of screening and prevention of ovarian cancer among high-risk women in the United States and Europe is one of mutual inspiration, with researchers learning from each others' findings and insights and collaborating with investigators from both sides of the Atlantic ocean. Examples of simultaneous and joint development of knowledge and scientific points of view include the paradigm shift from ovarian to fallopian tube high-grade serous cancer and the cessation of simultaneous adoption of ovarian cancer screening by clinicians in both the United States and Europe. Examples of joint efforts with fruitful results include international collaboration in large population-based, genome-wide association studies and in epidemiologic database studies. Research in the field of hereditary ovarian cancer is a great example of mutual inspiration and joint efforts for the purpose of improving knowledge and health care for women with hereditary ovarian cancer.

Screening and diagnosis of endometrial cancer in Lynch syndrome

Lynch syndrome (LS) is an autosomal dominant inherited cancer predisposition syndrome caused by a mismatch of DNA repair (MMR system). Lifetime risk of developing endometrial and ovarian cancer in LS is higher than in the general population and gynecologic screening appears interesting. Screening is based on several tests: pelvic ultrasound, endometrial biopsy and hysteroscopy for endometrial cancer, pelvic ultrasound and CA125 for ovarian cancer. Those tests appear efficient for the diagnosis of gynecologic cancers in LS. Nevertheless, screening tests have not proved clinical benefit until now, and potential problems of compliance, risk of false negative cases, and interval cancer associated with screening do justify offering prophylactic surgery to patients. Women with LS should be informed of the potential benefits and risks of screening and the importance of evaluation in case of gynecologic symptoms or abnormal bleeding. Chemoprevention by progestin-containing oral contraceptives and the treatment of premalignant lesion are available options for reducing the risk of endometrial cancer in LS population.

The genetic prediction of risk for gynecologic cancers

Salient to the intent of personalized medicine, hereditary cancer syndromes present significant opportunities in the treatment and prevention of some gynecologic cancers. Mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, and DNA mismatch repair genes: MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 are important causal agents in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) and Lynch syndromes. Though they only account for an estimated 10-18% of ovarian, tubal, peritoneal, and endometrial cancer cases, inherited cancers are imminently preventable if mutation carriers are identified in a timely manner. Population level screening is currently impractical due to low prevalence of disease, cost of testing, and ethical issues associated with testing, so diagnosis of these mutations is limited. Being affected by one of the heritable gynecologic malignancies is a logical entry point into the genetic counseling and testing pipeline for the patient and her family members. Thus, gynecologic cancer providers are uniquely positioned to diagnose germline mutations that can inform prognosis and treatment for their patients in addition to enabling prevention for patients' cancer-unaffected blood relatives, or "previvors". The purpose of this review is to describe our current perspective on testing for and implications of heritable cancer syndromes in the women with ovarian, tubal, peritoneal, and endometrial cancers.

Lynch syndrome in the 21st century: clinical perspectives

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common of all inherited cancer syndromes, associated with substantially elevated risks for colonic and extracolonic malignancies, earlier onset and high rates of multiple primary cancers. At the genetic level, it is caused by a defective mismatch repair (MMR) system due to presence of germline defects in at least one of the MMR genes- MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2 or EPCAM. An impaired MMR function during replication introduces infidelity in DNA sequence and leads to ubiquitous mutations at simple repetitive sequences (microsatellites), causing microsatellite instability (MSI). Although previously, clinicopathological criteria such as Amsterdam I/II and Revised Bethesda Guidelines were commonly used to identify suspected LS mutation carriers, there has been a recent push towards universally testing, especially in case of colorectal cancers (CRCs), through immunohistochemistry for expression of MMR proteins or through molecular tests (polymerase chain reaction, PCR) for MSI, in order to identify LS mutation carriers and subject them to genetic testing to ascertain the specific gene implicated. In this review, we have discussed the latest diagnostic strategies and the current screening and treatment guidelines for colonic and extracolonic cancers in clinically affected and at-risk individuals for LS.

A systematic review and economic evaluation of diagnostic strategies for Lynch syndrome

BACKGROUND

Lynch syndrome (LS) is an inherited autosomal dominant disorder characterised by an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) and other cancers, and caused by mutations in the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) mismatch repair genes.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of strategies to identify LS in newly diagnosed early-onset CRC patients (aged < 50 years). Cascade testing of relatives is employed in all strategies for individuals in whom LS is identified.

DATA SOURCES AND METHODS

Systematic reviews were conducted of the test accuracy of microsatellite instability (MSI) testing or immunohistochemistry (IHC) in individuals with CRC at risk of LS, and of economic evidence relating to diagnostic strategies for LS. Reviews were carried out in April 2012 (test accuracy); and in February 2012, repeated in February 2013 (economic evaluations). Databases searched included MEDLINE (1946 to April week 3, 2012), EMBASE (1980 to week 17, 2012) and Web of Science (inception to 30 April 2012), and risk of bias for test accuracy was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) quality appraisal tool. A de novo economic model of diagnostic strategies for LS was developed.

RESULTS

Inconsistencies in study designs precluded pooling of diagnostic test accuracy results from a previous systematic review and nine subsequent primary studies. These were of mixed quality, with significant methodological concerns identified for most. IHC and MSI can both play a part in diagnosing LS but neither is gold standard. No UK studies evaluated the cost-effectiveness of diagnosing and managing LS, although studies from other countries generally found some strategies to be cost-effective compared with no testing. The de novo model demonstrated that all strategies were cost-effective compared with no testing at a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), with the most cost-effective strategy utilising MSI and BRAF testing [incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) = £5491 per QALY]. The maximum health benefit to the population of interest would be obtained using universal germline testing, but this would not be a cost-effective use of NHS resources compared with the next best strategy. When the age limit was raised from 50 to 60 and 70 years, the ICERs compared with no testing increased but remained below £20,000 per QALY (except for universal germline testing with an age limit of 70 years). The total net health benefit increased with the age limit as more individuals with LS were identified. Uncertainty was evaluated through univariate sensitivity analyses, which suggested that the parameters substantially affecting cost-effectiveness: were the risk of CRC for individuals with LS; the average number of relatives identified per index patient; the effectiveness of colonoscopy in preventing metachronous CRC; the cost of colonoscopy; the duration of the psychological impact of genetic testing on health-related quality of life (HRQoL); and the impact of prophylactic hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy on HRQoL (this had the potential to make all testing strategies more expensive and less effective than no testing).

LIMITATIONS

The absence of high-quality data for the impact of prophylactic gynaecological surgery and the psychological impact of genetic testing on HRQoL is an acknowledged limitation.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that reflex testing for LS in newly diagnosed CRC patients aged < 50 years is cost-effective. Such testing may also be cost-effective in newly diagnosed CRC patients aged < 60 or < 70 years. Results are subject to uncertainty due to a number of parameters, for some of which good estimates were not identified. We recommend future research to estimate the cost-effectiveness of testing for LS in individuals with newly diagnosed endometrial or ovarian cancer, and the inclusion of aspirin chemoprevention. Further research is required to accurately estimate the impact of interventions on HRQoL.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002436.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Hereditary Syndromes Manifesting as Endometrial Carcinoma: How Can Pathological Features Aid Risk Assessment?

Endometrial carcinoma is the most common gynecological tumor worldwide. It can be the presenting malignancy, acting as the harbinger, of an undiagnosed hereditary syndrome. Up to 50% of females with Lynch syndrome present in this manner. Differentiation between Lynch, Muir-Torre, and Cowden syndromes can at times be challenging due to the overlapping features. Our review emphasizes on the strengths, pitfalls, and limitations of microscopic features as well as immunohistochemical and polymerase chain reaction- (PCR-) based tests used by laboratories to screen for DNA mismatch repair (MMR) and PTEN gene mutations in patients to enable a more targeted and cost effective approach in the use of confirmatory gene mutational analysis tests. This is crucial towards initiating timely and appropriate surveillance measures for the patient and affected family members. We also review the evidence postulating on the possible inclusion of uterine serous carcinoma as part of the spectrum of malignancies seen in hereditary breast and ovarian carcinoma syndrome, driven by mutations in BRCA1/2.

ACG clinical guideline: Genetic testing and management of hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes

This guideline presents recommendations for the management of patients with hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes. The initial assessment is the collection of a family history of cancers and premalignant gastrointestinal conditions and should provide enough information to develop a preliminary determination of the risk of a familial predisposition to cancer. Age at diagnosis and lineage (maternal and/or paternal) should be documented for all diagnoses, especially in first- and second-degree relatives. When indicated, genetic testing for a germline mutation should be done on the most informative candidate(s) identified through the family history evaluation and/or tumor analysis to confirm a diagnosis and allow for predictive testing of at-risk relatives. Genetic testing should be conducted in the context of pre- and post-test genetic counseling to ensure the patient's informed decision making. Patients who meet clinical criteria for a syndrome as well as those with identified pathogenic germline mutations should receive appropriate surveillance measures in order to minimize their overall risk of developing syndrome-specific cancers. This guideline specifically discusses genetic testing and management of Lynch syndrome, familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), attenuated familial adenomatous polyposis (AFAP), MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP), Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, juvenile polyposis syndrome, Cowden syndrome, serrated (hyperplastic) polyposis syndrome, hereditary pancreatic cancer, and hereditary gastric cancer.

Management of ovarian and endometrial cancers in women belonging to HNPCC carrier families: review of the literature and results of cancer risk assessment in Polish HNPCC families

BACKGROUND

Over half the cancer deaths in HNPCC families are due to extra-colonic malignancies that include endometrial and ovarian cancers. The benefits of surveillance for gynecological cancers are not yet proven and there is no consensus on the optimal surveillance recommendations for women with MMR mutations.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature and evaluated gynecological cancer risk in a series of 631 Polish HNPCC families classified into either Lynch Syndrome (LS, MMR mutations detected) or HNPCC (fulfillment of the Amsterdam or modified Amsterdam criteria).

RESULTS

Published data clearly indicates no benefit for ovarian cancer screening in contrast to risk reducing surgery. We confirmed a significantly increased risk of OC in Polish LS families (OR = 4,6, p < 0.001) and an especially high risk of OC was found for women under 50 years of age: OR = 32,6, p < 0.0001 (95% CI 12,96-81,87). The cumulative OC risk to 50 year of life was calculated to be 10%. Six out of 19 (32%) early-onset patients from LS families died from OC within 2 years of diagnosis. We confirmed a significantly increased risk of EC (OR = 26, 95% CI 11,36-58,8; p < 0,001). The cumulative risk for EC in Polish LS families was calculated to be 67%.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to the increased risk of OC and absence of any benefit from gynecological screening reported in the literature it is recommended that prophylactic oophorectomy for female carriers of MMR mutations after 35 year of age should be considered as a risk reducing option. Annual transvaginal ultrasound supported by CA125 or HE4 marker testing should be performed after prophylactic surgery in these women. Due to the high risk of EC it is reasonable to offer, after the age of 35 years, annual clinical gynecologic examinations with transvaginal ultrasound supported by routine aspiration sampling of the endometrium for women from either LS or HNPCC families. An alternative option, which could be taken into consideration for women preferring surgical prevention, is risk reducing total hysterectomy (with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy) for carriers after childbearing is complete.

Combined colonoscopy and endometrial biopsy cancer screening results in women with Lynch syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Endometrial biopsy (EMBx) and colonoscopy performed under the same sedation is termed combined screening and has been shown to be feasible and to provide a less painful and more satisfactory experience for women with Lynch syndrome (LS). However, clinical results of these screening efforts have not been reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes and patient compliance with serial screenings over the last 10.5 years.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data for 55 women with LS who underwent combined screening every 1-2 years between 2002 and 2013. Colonoscopy and endometrial biopsy were performed by a gastroenterologist and a gynecologist, with the patient under conscious sedation.

RESULTS

Out of 111 screening visits in these 55 patients, endometrial biopsies detected one simple hyperplasia, three complex hyperplasia, and one endometrioid adenocarcinoma (FIGO Stage 1A). Seventy-one colorectal polyps were removed in 29 patients, of which 29 were tubular adenomas. EMBx in our study detected endometrial cancer in 0.9% (1/111) of surveillance visits, and premalignant hyperplasia in 3.6% (4/111) of screening visits. No interval endometrial or colorectal cancers were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined screening under sedation is feasible and less painful than EMBx alone. Our endometrial pathology detection rates were comparable to yearly screening studies. Our results indicate that screening of asymptomatic LS women with EMBx every 1-2 years, rather than annually, is effective in the early detection of (pre)cancerous lesions, leading to their prompt definitive management, and potential reduction in endometrial cancer.

Guidelines on genetic evaluation and management of Lynch syndrome: a consensus statement by the US Multi-Society Task Force on colorectal cancer

The Multi-Society Task Force, in collaboration with invited experts, developed guidelines to assist health care providers with the appropriate provision of genetic testing and management of patients at risk for and affected with Lynch syndrome as follows: Figure 1 provides a colorectal cancer risk assessment tool to screen individuals in the office or endoscopy setting; Figure 2 illustrates a strategy for universal screening for Lynch syndrome by tumor testing of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer; Figures 3-6 provide algorithms for genetic evaluation of affected and at-risk family members of pedigrees with Lynch syndrome; Table 10 provides guidelines for screening at-risk and affected persons with Lynch syndrome; and Table 12 lists the guidelines for the management of patients with Lynch syndrome. A detailed explanation of Lynch syndrome and the methodology utilized to derive these guidelines, as well as an explanation of, and supporting literature for, these guidelines are provided.

Guidelines on genetic evaluation and management of Lynch syndrome: a consensus statement by the US Multi-society Task Force on colorectal cancer

The Multi-Society Task Force, in collaboration with invited experts, developed guidelines to assist health care providers with the appropriate provision of genetic testing and management of patients at risk for and affected with Lynch syndrome as follows: Figure 1 provides a colorectal cancer risk assessment tool to screen individuals in the office or endoscopy setting; Figure 2 illustrates a strategy for universal screening for Lynch syndrome by tumor testing of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer; Figures 3,4,5,6 provide algorithms for genetic evaluation of affected and at-risk family members of pedigrees with Lynch syndrome; Table 10 provides guidelines for screening at-risk and affected persons with Lynch syndrome; and Table 12 lists the guidelines for the management of patients with Lynch syndrome. A detailed explanation of Lynch syndrome and the methodology utilized to derive these guidelines, as well as an explanation of, and supporting literature for, these guidelines are provided.

Review of findings in prophylactic gynaecological specimens in Lynch syndrome with literature review and recommendations for grossing

AIMS

Prophylactic hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy is being increasingly undertaken in patients with Lynch syndrome (LS). The pathological features in such specimens are not well described and, unlike the SEE-FIM protocol for salpingo-oophorectomy specimens in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and the gastrectomy grossing protocols for patients with CDH1 (E-cadherin) mutations, guidelines have not been devised for the grossing of prophylactic gynaecological specimens from LS patients. We aimed to review the pathological findings in a series of prophylactic gynaecological specimens from LS patients and develop guidelines for the grossing of these specimens.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We reviewed the pathological findings in 25 prophylactic gynaecological specimens from LS patients and audited the grossing protocols in different centres across Ontario, Canada. We found a 32% incidence of endometrial carcinoma or a precursor lesion; the two endometrial cancers identified were low-grade, low-stage endometrioid adenocarcinomas. To address the absence of guidelines for pathological examination, we undertook a literature review of gynaecological malignancies and incidental findings in prophylactic specimens in LS patients.

CONCLUSION

We provide recommendations regarding the grossing of such specimens which includes in-toto examination of the lower uterine segment, endometrium, ovaries and fallopian tubes with representative sampling of the cervix.

The results of gynecologic surveillance in families with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to estimate the incidence rate of endometrial cancer (EC) and to evaluate the results of EC-surveillance in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) families.

METHODS

All at-risk women recommended for EC-surveillance by the HNPCC-register-2959 women (19,334women years)-were included. Data on EC-surveillance were available for 871 women (6894women years), who had performed 1945 surveillance visits. The average surveillance period was 7.9 (range 0.1-21.7) years and 46% of the women had had less than 3years between their visits.

RESULTS

During 19,334women years, 60 women with gynecological malignancies or premalignancies were diagnosed. Thirty-nine women had EC. Of these, 31 were from families with identified MMR gene mutations with the median age at diagnosis of 54 (39-83) years (Incidence Rate, IR=0.63 per 100women years) and four women from each Amsterdam (AMS)-positive and AMS-like families (median age 64 (55-73) years, IR=0.06 and 0.05 per 100women years, respectively, p<.0001). Among the 871 surveilled women, 13 EC were found: 7/13 cases were diagnosed by surveillance examination-two as prevalent cancers, diagnosed at the first visit-and 6/13 based on symptoms. In addition, five complex atypical hyperplasias and four ovarian cancers (OCs) were diagnosed. All these women were MMR mutation carriers.

CONCLUSION

Based on 19,334women years of EC-surveillance, our analysis provides a thorough estimation of the EC risk in women with an MMR mutation, or suspected of having Lynch syndrome. We conclude that EC surveillance should only be targeted at MMR-mutation carriers.

Management of genetic syndromes predisposing to gynecologic cancers

Women with personal and family histories consistent with gynecologic cancer-associated hereditary cancer susceptibility disorders should be referred for genetic risk assessment and counseling. Genetic counseling facilitates informed medical decision making regarding genetic testing, screening, and treatment, including chemoprevention and risk-reducing surgery. Because of limitations of ovarian cancer screening, hereditary breast and ovarian cancer-affected women are offered risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) between ages 35 and 40 years, or when childbearing is complete. Women with documented Lynch syndrome, associated with mutations in mismatch repair genes, should be screened at a young age and provided prevention options, including consideration of risk-reducing total abdominal hysterectomy and BSO, as well as intensive gastrointestinal screening. Clinicians caring for high-risk women must consider the potential adverse ethical, legal, and social issues associated with hereditary cancer risk assessment and testing. Additionally, at-risk family members should be alerted to their cancer risks, as well as the availability of risk assessment, counseling, and treatment services.

The additional value of endometrial sampling in the early detection of endometrial cancer in women with Lynch syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Based on previous studies, standard gynecological screening consisting of annual transvaginal ultrasonography (TVU) was added with endometrial sampling in women with Lynch syndrome (LS). The aim of this study was to evaluate the additional value of endometrial sampling in detecting (pre)malignancies of the endometrial tissue in women with LS or first-degree relatives.

METHODS

All women above 30 years of age with LS or first-degree relatives at 50% risk of LS are offered annual gynecological screening in our family cancer clinic. Endometrial screening results from January 2003-December 2007 (period I: standard screening by transvaginal sonography and serum CA125) were compared with screening results from January 2008-June 2012 (period II: standard screening added with endometrial sampling).

RESULTS

Seventy five women (300 patient years) were screened annually. There were 266 screening visits, 117 in period I and 149 in period II. In period I, four premalignant endometrial lesions were detected and one endometrial carcinoma (FIGO stage IB). In period II, two premalignancies were found. None of the lesions would have been missed without standard endometrial sampling. No interval endometrial cancers were detected in this study.

CONCLUSION

In this study, annual endometrial screening seems an effective screening tool in the detection of premalignancies and early endometrial cancer in women with LS. Adding standard endometrial sampling to annual TVU has no additional value in the early detection of (pre)malignant endometrial lesions in women with LS in this study.

Revised guidelines for the clinical management of Lynch syndrome (HNPCC): recommendations by a group of European experts

Lynch syndrome (LS) is characterised by the development of colorectal cancer, endometrial cancer and various other cancers, and is caused by a mutation in one of the mismatch repair genes: MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 or PMS2. In 2007, a group of European experts (the Mallorca group) published guidelines for the clinical management of LS. Since then substantial new information has become available necessitating an update of the guidelines. In 2011 and 2012 workshops were organised in Palma de Mallorca. A total of 35 specialists from 13 countries participated in the meetings. The first step was to formulate important clinical questions. Then a systematic literature search was performed using the Pubmed database and manual searches of relevant articles. During the workshops the outcome of the literature search was discussed in detail. The guidelines described in this paper may be helpful for the appropriate management of families with LS. Prospective controlled studies should be undertaken to improve further the care of these families.

Impact of genetic testing on endometrial cancer risk-reducing practices in women at risk for Lynch syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Due to the increased lifetime risk of endometrial cancer (EC), guidelines recommend that women with Lynch syndrome (LS) age ≥ 35 undergo annual EC surveillance or prophylactic hysterectomy (PH). The aim of this study was to examine the uptake of these risk-reducing strategies.

METHODS

The study population included women meeting clinical criteria for genetic evaluation for LS. Data on cancer risk-reducing behaviors were collected from subjects enrolled in two distinct studies: (1) a multicenter cross-sectional study involving completion of a one-time questionnaire, or (2) a single-center longitudinal study in which subjects completed questionnaires before and after undergoing genetic testing. The main outcome was uptake of EC risk-reducing practices.

RESULTS

In the cross-sectional cohort, 58/77 (75%) women at risk for LS-associated EC reported engaging in EC risk-reduction. Personal history of genetic testing was associated with uptake of EC surveillance or PH (OR 17.1; 95% CI 4.1-70.9). Prior to genetic testing for LS, 26/40 (65%) women in the longitudinal cohort reported engaging in EC risk-reduction. At one-year follow-up, 16/16 (100%) mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutation carriers were adherent to guidelines for EC risk-reduction, 9 (56%) of whom had undergone PH. By three-year follow-up, 11/16 (69%) MMR mutation carriers had undergone PH. Among women with negative or uninformative genetic test results, none underwent PH after testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic testing for LS is strongly associated with uptake of EC risk-reducing practices. Women found to have LS in this study underwent prophylactic gynecologic surgery at rates comparable to those published for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Annual outpatient hysteroscopy and endometrial sampling (OHES) in HNPCC/Lynch syndrome (LS)

BACKGROUND

LS women have a 40-60% lifetime risk of endometrial cancer (EC). Most international guidelines recommend screening. However, data on efficacy are limited.

PURPOSE

To assess the performance of OHES for EC screening in LS and compare it with transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) alone.

METHODS

A prospective observational cohort study of LS women attending a tertiary high-risk familial gynaecological cancer clinic was conducted. LS women opting for EC screening underwent annual OHES and TVS. Histopathological specimens were processed using a strict protocol. Data of women screened between October 2007 and March 2010 were analysed from a bespoke database. Histology was used as the gold standard. Diagnostic accuracy of OHES was compared with TVS using specificity, and positive (PLR) and negative (NLR) likelihood ratios.

RESULTS

Forty-one LS women underwent 69 screens (41 prevalent, 28 incident). Four (three prevalent, one incident) women were detected to have EC/atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH), five had endometrial polyps and two had endometrial hyperplasia (EH) on OHES. TVS detected two of four EC/AEH. OHES had similar specificity of 89.8% (CI 79.2, 96.2%), but higher PLR 9.8 (CI 4.6, 21) and lower NLR (zero) compared to TVS: specificity 84.75%(CI 73, 92.8%), PLR 3.28 (CI 1.04, 10.35) and NLR 0.59 (CI 0.22, 1.58). No interval cancers occurred over a median follow-up of 22 months. The annual incidence was 3.57% (CI 0.09, 18.35) for EC, 10.71% (CI 2.27, 28.23) for polyps and 21.4% (CI 8.3, 40.1) for any endometrial pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that in LS, annual OHES is acceptable and has high diagnostic accuracy for EC/AEH screening. Larger international studies are needed for confirmation, given the relatively small numbers of LS women at individual centres. It reinforces the current recommendation that endometrial sampling is crucial when screening these women.

Lynch or not Lynch? Is that always a question?

The familial cancer syndrome referred to as Lynch I and II was renamed hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) only to revert later to Lynch syndrome (LS). LS is the most frequent human predisposition for the development of colorectal cancer (CRC), and probably also for endometrial and gastric cancers, although it has yet to acquire a consensus name. Its estimated prevalence ranges widely from 2% to 7% of all CRCs due to the fact that tumors from patients with LS are difficult to recognize at both the clinical and molecular level. This review is based on two assumptions. First, all LS patients inherit a predisposition to develop CRC (without polyposis) and/or other tumors from the Lynch spectrum. Second, all LS patients have a germline defect in one of the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes. When a somatic second hit inactivates the relevant MMR gene, the consequence is instability of DNA repeat sequences such as microsatellites and the tumors are referred to as having the microsatellite instability (MSI) phenotype. However, some of the inherited predisposition to develop CRC without concurrent polyposis, termed HNPCC, is found in non-LS patients, while not all MSI tumors are from LS cases. LS tumors are therefore at the junction of inherited and MSI cases. We describe here the defining characteristics of LS tumors that differentiate them from inherited non-MSI tumors and from non-inherited MSI tumors.

Genetic risk and gynecologic cancers

Although most gynecologic malignancies are sporadic, hereditary cancer syndromes cause a substantial portion of these cancers. Given that the diagnosis of these syndromes has prognostic and therapeutic implications for the patient, as well as preventive implications for her family members, genetic testing is now an accepted part of the management of the patient who has gynecologic cancer.

Strategies to identify the Lynch syndrome among patients with colorectal cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Testing has been advocated for all persons with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer to identify families with the Lynch syndrome, an autosomal dominant cancer-predisposition syndrome that is a paradigm for personalized medicine.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of strategies to identify the Lynch syndrome, with attention to sex, age at screening, and differential effects for probands and relatives.

DESIGN

Markov model that incorporated risk for colorectal, endometrial, and ovarian cancers.

DATA SOURCES

Published literature.

TARGET POPULATION

All persons with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer and their relatives.

TIME HORIZON

Lifetime.

PERSPECTIVE

Third-party payer.

INTERVENTION

Strategies based on clinical criteria, prediction algorithms, tumor testing, or up-front germline mutation testing, followed by tailored screening and risk-reducing surgery.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Life-years, cancer cases and deaths, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

The benefit of all strategies accrued primarily to relatives with a mutation associated with the Lynch syndrome, particularly women, whose life expectancy could increase by approximately 4 years with hysterectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy and adherence to colorectal cancer screening recommendations. At current rates of germline testing, screening, and prophylactic surgery, the strategies reduced deaths from colorectal cancer by 7% to 42% and deaths from endometrial and ovarian cancer by 1% to 6%. Among tumor-testing strategies, immunohistochemistry followed by BRAF mutation testing was preferred, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $36,200 per life-year gained.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

The number of relatives tested per proband was a critical determinant of both effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, with testing of 3 to 4 relatives required for most strategies to meet a threshold of $50,000 per life-year gained. Immunohistochemistry followed by BRAF mutation testing was preferred in 59% of iterations in probabilistic sensitivity analysis at a threshold of $100,000 per life-year gained. Screening for the Lynch syndrome with immunohistochemistry followed by BRAF mutation testing only up to age 70 years cost $44,000 per incremental life-year gained compared with screening only up to age 60 years, and screening without an upper age limit cost $88,700 per incremental life-year gained compared with screening only up to age 70 years.

LIMITATION

Other types of cancer, uncertain family pedigrees, and genetic variants of unknown significance were not considered.

CONCLUSION

Widespread colorectal tumor testing to identify families with the Lynch syndrome could yield substantial benefits at acceptable costs, particularly for women with a mutation associated with the Lynch syndrome who begin regular screening and have risk-reducing surgery. The cost-effectiveness of such testing depends on the participation rate among relatives at risk for the Lynch syndrome.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health.

Strategies to identify the Lynch syndrome among patients with colorectal cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Testing has been advocated for all persons with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer to identify families with the Lynch syndrome, an autosomal dominant cancer-predisposition syndrome that is a paradigm for personalized medicine.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of strategies to identify the Lynch syndrome, with attention to sex, age at screening, and differential effects for probands and relatives.

DESIGN

Markov model that incorporated risk for colorectal, endometrial, and ovarian cancers.

DATA SOURCES

Published literature.

TARGET POPULATION

All persons with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer and their relatives.

TIME HORIZON

Lifetime.

PERSPECTIVE

Third-party payer.

INTERVENTION

Strategies based on clinical criteria, prediction algorithms, tumor testing, or up-front germline mutation testing, followed by tailored screening and risk-reducing surgery.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Life-years, cancer cases and deaths, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

The benefit of all strategies accrued primarily to relatives with a mutation associated with the Lynch syndrome, particularly women, whose life expectancy could increase by approximately 4 years with hysterectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy and adherence to colorectal cancer screening recommendations. At current rates of germline testing, screening, and prophylactic surgery, the strategies reduced deaths from colorectal cancer by 7% to 42% and deaths from endometrial and ovarian cancer by 1% to 6%. Among tumor-testing strategies, immunohistochemistry followed by BRAF mutation testing was preferred, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $36,200 per life-year gained.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

The number of relatives tested per proband was a critical determinant of both effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, with testing of 3 to 4 relatives required for most strategies to meet a threshold of $50,000 per life-year gained. Immunohistochemistry followed by BRAF mutation testing was preferred in 59% of iterations in probabilistic sensitivity analysis at a threshold of $100,000 per life-year gained. Screening for the Lynch syndrome with immunohistochemistry followed by BRAF mutation testing only up to age 70 years cost $44,000 per incremental life-year gained compared with screening only up to age 60 years, and screening without an upper age limit cost $88,700 per incremental life-year gained compared with screening only up to age 70 years.

LIMITATION

Other types of cancer, uncertain family pedigrees, and genetic variants of unknown significance were not considered.

CONCLUSION

Widespread colorectal tumor testing to identify families with the Lynch syndrome could yield substantial benefits at acceptable costs, particularly for women with a mutation associated with the Lynch syndrome who begin regular screening and have risk-reducing surgery. The cost-effectiveness of such testing depends on the participation rate among relatives at risk for the Lynch syndrome.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health.

A systematic review of gynecological cancer surveillance in women belonging to hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome) families

OBJECTIVE/DESIGN

We performed a systematic review of studies that evaluate the role of gynecological cancer surveillance in women who carry a hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) mutation or belong to a family that fulfills the criteria for HNPCC.

METHODS

The PubMed database and a clinical trials database were used to identify relevant studies. We included studies that reported results of gynecological cancer surveillance in women who carry a HNPCC mutation, belong to a family in which a HNPCC mutation was detected or belong to a family fulfilling the Amsterdam II criteria.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Number and stage of cancers, interval cancers and cancer precursor states detected at screening.

RESULTS

Five studies fulfilled our review criteria. Surveillance modalities for endometrial cancer included transvaginal ultrasound combined with endometrial sampling when indicated, or transvaginal ultrasound with a routine endometrial biopsy, and, in certain studies, the tumor marker CA-125. The highest yield of pathological findings in surveillance visits, from 5 to 6.5%, occurred in studies that included routine endometrial biopsies. Without a routine sampling, 7/14 cancers and 11/18 hyperplasias would have been missed. One case of advanced ovarian cancer was detected at surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently available published studies on gynecological cancer surveillance in women with HNPCC do not adequately allow for evidence-based clinical decisions. Detection of endometrial cancer or hyperplasia in nonsymptomatic women belonging to an HNPCC family is improved by adding routine endometrial sampling along with transvaginal ultrasound for surveillance visits. No benefit was shown for ovarian cancer surveillance.

Risk of endometrial cancer for women diagnosed with HNPCC-related colorectal carcinoma

The risk of endometrial cancer (EC) subsequent to a diagnosis of colorectal cancer in women with a germline mutation in a mismatch repair gene [Lynch syndrome or hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer (HNPCC)] is unknown. We estimated the risk of EC following a diagnosis of colorectal carcinoma (CRC) for women with Lynch syndrome. A retrospective cohort study was performed on women diagnosed with CRC with a germline mutation in a mismatch repair (MMR) gene (Lynch syndrome cases), and women with microsatellite stable (MSS) CRC who were not known to carry a germline mutation (non-Lynch cases), identified from the Colon Cancer Family Registry. The incidence of EC following CRC was estimated and compared for women with and without Lynch syndrome, using adjusted hazards ratios calculated for time at risk among each group. A total of 112 women with Lynch syndrome and a previous diagnosis of CRC were compared with 908 women without Lynch and with a MSS CRC diagnosis. The estimated 10-year cumulative risk of EC subsequent to CRC was 23.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 15-36%] for Lynch syndrome women compared with 1.6% (95% CI: 0.7-3.8%) for non-Lynch women. After adjusting for ascertainment, age at diagnosis and diagnosis of other cancers, risk of subsequent diagnosis with EC was elevated sixfold in women with Lynch syndrome compared with non-Lynch women (HR 6.2; 95% CI 2.2-17.3; p = 0.001). Approximately one quarter of women diagnosed with Lynch syndrome-associated CRC developed EC within 10 years. This supports the sentinel cancer concept and suggests that active and early management is important for these women.