The PREMM(1,2,6) model predicts risk of MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6 germline mutations based on cancer history

Lynch Syndrome: From Multidisciplinary Management to Precision Prevention

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lynch syndrome (LS) is currently one of the most prevalent hereditary cancer conditions, accounting for 3% of all colorectal cancers and for up to 15% of those with DNA mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency, and it was one of the first historically identified. The understanding of the molecular carcinogenesis of LS tumors has progressed significantly in recent years. We aim to review the most recent advances in LS research and explore genotype-based approaches in surveillance, personalized cancer prevention, and treatment strategies.

METHODS

PubMed was searched to identify relevant studies, conducted up to December 2023, investigating molecular carcinogenesis in LS, surveillance strategies, cancer prevention, and treatment in LS tumors.

RESULTS

Multigene panel sequencing is becoming the benchmark in the diagnosis of LS, allowing for the detection of a pathogenic constitutional variant in one of the MMR genes. Emerging data from randomized controlled trials suggest possible preventive roles of resistant starch and/or aspirin in LS. Vaccination with immunogenic frameshift peptides appears to be a promising approach for both the treatment and prevention of LS-associated cancers, as evidenced by pre-clinical and preliminary phase 1/2a studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Although robust diagnostic algorithms, including prompt testing of tumor tissue for MMR defects and referral for genetic counselling, currently exist for suspected LS in CRC patients, the indications for LS screening in cancer-free individuals still need to be refined and standardized. Investigation into additional genetic and non-genetic factors that may explain residual rates of interval cancers, even in properly screened populations, would allow for more tailored preventive strategies.

Lynch Syndrome Biopathology and Treatment: The Potential Role of microRNAs in Clinical Practice

Lynch syndrome (LS), also known as Hereditary Non-Polyposis Colorectal Cancer (HNPCC), is an autosomal dominant cancer syndrome which causes about 2-3% of cases of colorectal carcinoma. The development of LS is due to the genetic and epigenetic inactivation of genes involved in the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) system, causing an epiphenomenon known as microsatellite instability (MSI). Despite the fact that the genetics of the vast majority of MSI-positive (MSI+) cancers can be explained, the etiology of this specific subset is still poorly understood. As a possible new mechanism, it has been recently demonstrated that the overexpression of certain microRNAs (miRNAs, miRs), such as miR-155, miR-21, miR-137, can induce MSI or modulate the expression of the genes involved in LS pathogenesis. MiRNAs are small RNA molecules that regulate gene expression at the post-transcriptional level by playing a critical role in the modulation of key oncogenic pathways. Increasing evidence of the link between MSI and miRNAs in LS prompted a deeper investigation into the miRNome involved in these diseases. In this regard, in this study, we discuss the emerging role of miRNAs as crucial players in the onset and progression of LS as well as their potential use as disease biomarkers and therapeutic targets in the current view of precision medicine.

Early-onset colorectal cancer: A review of current knowledge

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most prevalent malignancies worldwide. Although most prevalent among older people, its incidence above 50 years old has been decreasing globally in the last decades, probably as a result of better screening. Paradoxically, its incidence in patients below 50 years old [early-onset CRC (EO-CRC)] has been increasing, for reasons not yet fully understood. EO-CRC’s increasing incidence is genre independent but shows racial disparities and has been described to occur worldwide. It follows a birth-cohort effect which probably reflects a change in exposure to CRC risk factors. Its incidence is predicted to double until 2030, which makes EO-CRC a serious public health issue. Both modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors have been identified - some are potential targets for preventive measures. EO-CRC is often diagnosed at advanced stages and histological features associated with poor prognosis have been described. EO-CRC presents some distinctive features: Microsatellite in-stability is common, but another subtype of tumours, both microsatellite and chromosome stable also seems relevant. There are no age-specific treatment protocols and studies on EO-CRC survival rates have shown conflicting data. Due to the higher germline pathological mutations found in EO-CRC patients, an accurate genetic risk evaluation should be performed. In this review, we summarize the current evidence on epidemiological, clinical, histopathological and molecular features of EO-CRC and discuss the contribution of genetics and lifestyle risk factors. We further comment on screening strategies and specific dimensions to consider when dealing with a younger cancer patient.

Occurrence of variants of unknown clinical significance in genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome and Lynch syndrome: a literature review and analytical observational retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Over the last decade, the implementation of multigene panels for hereditary tumor syndrome has increased at our institution (Inselspital, University Hospital Berne, Switzerland). The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of variants of unknown significance (VUS) in patients with suspected Lynch syndrome and suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome, the latter in connection with the trend toward ordering larger gene panels.

RESULTS

Retrospectively collected data from 1057 patients at our institution showed at least one VUS in 126 different cases (11.9%). In patients undergoing genetic testing for BRCA1/2, the prevalence of VUS was 6%. When < 10 additional genes were tested in addition to BRCA1/2, the prevalence increased to 13.8%, and 31.8% for > 10 additional genes, respectively. The gene most frequently affected with a VUS was ATM. 6% of our patients who were tested for Lynch syndrome had a VUS result in either MLH1, MSH2 or MSH6.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrate that panel testing statistically significantly increases VUS rates due to variants in non-BRCA genes. Good genetic counseling before and after obtaining results is therefore particularly important when conducting multigene panels to minimize patient uncertainty due to VUS results.

The Leipzig Health Atlas-An Open Platform to Present, Archive, and Share Biomedical Data, Analyses, and Models Online

BACKGROUND

 Clinical trials, epidemiological studies, clinical registries, and other prospective research projects, together with patient care services, are main sources of data in the medical research domain. They serve often as a basis for secondary research in evidence-based medicine, prediction models for disease, and its progression. This data are often neither sufficiently described nor accessible. Related models are often not accessible as a functional program tool for interested users from the health care and biomedical domains.

OBJECTIVE

 The interdisciplinary project Leipzig Health Atlas (LHA) was developed to close this gap. LHA is an online platform that serves as a sustainable archive providing medical data, metadata, models, and novel phenotypes from clinical trials, epidemiological studies, and other medical research projects.

METHODS

 Data, models, and phenotypes are described by semantically rich metadata. The platform prefers to share data and models presented in original publications but is also open for nonpublished data. LHA provides and associates unique permanent identifiers for each dataset and model. Hence, the platform can be used to share prepared, quality-assured datasets and models while they are referenced in publications. All managed data, models, and phenotypes in LHA follow the FAIR principles, with public availability or restricted access for specific user groups.

RESULTS

 The LHA platform is in productive mode (https://www.health-atlas.de/). It is already used by a variety of clinical trial and research groups and is becoming increasingly popular also in the biomedical community. LHA is an integral part of the forthcoming initiative building a national research data infrastructure for health in Germany.

Oncology Informatics for Lynch Syndrome Research and Care: A Literature Review

PURPOSE

This study aims to review and evaluate available informatics platforms for research and management purposes of Lynch syndrome (LS) to identify gaps and needs for future development.

METHODS

LS informatics tools were identified through literature search in four publication databases (1 and Scopus). First, the LS and functional elements of every informatics tools for LS were introduced. Then, current existing LS informatics tools were reviewed and explained.

RESULTS

A detailed review of implemented studies shows that many types of informatics platforms are available for LS management (ie, prediction model, clinical decision support system, database website, and other tools for research and management purposes of LS). Moreover, several dimensions of existing LS informatics tools were discussed and features and positive findings were reported.

CONCLUSION

Reviewing the literature reveals that several LS informatics tools were focused on gene-specific estimate, cancer risk prediction, identifying/screening patients, supporting personalized care of individuals with LS, and storing mismatch repair mutations information. Nevertheless, these platforms do not fully cover the care and research purposes. For instance, future developments of LS tools require more attention to dynamic knowledgebase, extra-colonic lynch–related cancers on the basis of precision medicine, variants of unknown significance, and support from diagnosis to surveillance for patient follow-up. Insights and recommendations provided in this study could help researchers and developers to meet the existing challenges in future developments.

Approach to Familial Predisposition to Colorectal Cancer

The traditional approach of one-size-fits-all for colorectal cancer has been replaced by personalized interventions to an individual's unique genetic, molecular, and environmental profile, seeking to identify high-risk individuals who would benefit from individualized screening and surveillance. This change in approach is due, in part, to emerging technologies, such as next-generation DNA sequencing.

Lynch Syndrome: From Carcinogenesis to Prevention Interventions

Simple Summary

Promoting proper preventive interventions to reduce morbidity and mortality is one of the most important challenges pertaining to inherited conditions. Lynch syndrome (LS) is an inherited disorder that predisposes to several kinds of tumor and is responsible for a relevant proportion of human colorectal and endometrial cancers. Recent knowledge has allowed for a better understanding of the genetic cause, pathogenesis, underlying immunological mechanisms, epidemiological distribution, and prevalence of this disease. This opens up unpredictable perspectives of translating such knowledge into validated programs for prevention and surveillance, in order to reduce the health impact of this disease through medical interventions before cancer development. In our review, we summarize the updated guidelines of the screening, surveillance, and risk-reducing strategies for LS patients. Moreover, we present novel opportunities in the treatment and prevention of LS patients through harnessing the immune system using immunocheckpoint inhibitors and vaccines.

Abstract

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common inherited disorder responsible for an increased risk of developing cancers at different sites, most frequently in the gastrointestinal and genitourinary tracts, caused by a germline pathogenic variant affecting the DNA mismatch repair system. Surveillance and risk-reducing procedures are currently available and warranted for LS patients, depending on underlying germline mutation, and are focused on relevant targets for early cancer diagnosis or primary prevention. Although pharmacological approaches for preventing LS-associated cancer development were started many years ago, to date, aspirin remains the most studied drug intervention and the only one suggested by the main surveillance guidelines, despite the conflicting findings. Furthermore, we also note that remarkable advances in anticancer drug discovery have given a significant boost to the application of novel immunological strategies such as immunocheckpoint inhibitors and vaccines, not only for cancer treatment, but also in a preventive setting. In this review, we outline the clinical, biologic, genetic, and morphological features of LS as well as the recent three-pathways carcinogenesis model. Furthermore, we provide an update on the dedicated screening, surveillance, and risk-reducing strategies for LS patients and describe emerging opportunities of harnessing the immune system.

Familial colorectal cancer

The introduction of average-risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs means that many subjects with family history of CRC and without well-described inherited syndromes can benefit from these public health policies. Therefore, the definition of which individuals should be named under the umbrella of the term "familial CRC" should be reconsidered to include only those who are outside of the protection of population-based screening and need to be moved towards a more intensive surveillance strategy. Two subgroups have been reported as having a high enough CRC risk to be included within the term "familial risk of CRC": individuals who have ≥1 first degree relative (FDR) with CRC diagnosed at age <50 years, and those who have ≥2 FDRs with CRC. Colonoscopy-based screening starting at age 40 years is proposed as the most accepted recommendation for these individuals. Finally, the evolution of Lynch syndrome screening from clinical criteria to tumor tissue analysis and new tools for screening pathogenic gene mutations associated with cancer susceptibility in individuals with early-onset CRC might help to reduce misclassification of familial CRC.

Comprehensive assessment of germline pathogenic variant detection in tumor-only sequencing

Background:

Tumor-only sequencing, implemented for the identification of somatic variants, is oftentimes used for the detection of actionable germline variants. We sought to determine whether tumor-only sequencing assays are suitable for detection of actionable germline variants, given their importance for the delivery of targeted therapies and risk-reducing measures.

Patients and methods:

The detection of germline variants affecting moderate- and high-penetrance cancer susceptibility genes (CSGs) by tumor-only sequencing was compared to clinical germline testing in 21 333 cancer patients who underwent tumor and germline testing using the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-authorized Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Targets (MSK-IMPACT) assay. Seven homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), two DNA damage response (DDR) and four mismatch repair (MMR) genes, as well as NF1, RB1 and TP53 were included in the analysis. FDA-authorized and New York State Department of Health-approved sequencing methods for germline, tumor/normal and tumor-only sequencing assays and analytical pipelines were employed.

Results:

In patients who underwent tumor and germline sequencing, as compared to clinical genetic testing, tumor-only sequencing failed to detect 10.5% of clinically actionable pathogenic germline variants in CSGs, including 18.8%, 12.8% and 7.3% of germline variants in MMR, DDR and HRD genes, respectively. The sensitivity for detection of pathogenic germline variants by tumor-only sequencing was 89.5%. Whilst the vast majority of pathogenic germline exonic single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) and small indels were detected by tumor-only sequencing, large percentages of germline copy number variants, intronic variants and repetitive element insertions were not detected.

Conclusions:

Tumor-only sequencing is adequate for the detection of clinically actionable germline variants, particularly for SNVs and small indels; however, a small subset of alterations affecting HRD, DDR and MMR genes may not be detected optimally. Therefore, for high-risk patients with negative tumor-only sequencing results, clinical genetic testing could be considered given the impact of these variants on therapy and genetic counseling.

Interval between the First Cancer and the Genetic Diagnosis in Lynch Syndrome Probands

Objective Little is known about the time from developing a first cancer to confirming the presence of a mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutation for Lynch syndrome (LS) probands. Methods This was a retrospective single center study. LS probands, who have an MMR gene mutation that was confirmed first in a pedigree and thereafter developed at least one cancer, were included in this study. Results There were 21 LS probands who had developed at least one cancer; 6 with MLH1 mutations, 9 with MSH2 mutations, 4 with MSH6 mutations, and 2 with EPCAM deletions. The median ages at the first cancer and the genetic diagnosis were 47 (34-71) and 62 (38-84) years old, respectively. The mean interval between the first cancer and the genetic diagnosis was 11.0 (0-25) years, and 20 years or longer interval was required for the 5 probands. Six (28.6%) probands were older than 70 years, and 3 (14.3%) were in their 80s when they were diagnosed to have LS. The genetic diagnosis was confirmed at the first, second, third, and fourth cancer or later in 5, 5, 6, and 5 probands, respectively. Of the 16 cancers examined, 2 (12.5%) were microsatellite stable (MSS), both of whom had germline MSH6 mutations. All 17 LS probands who developed colorectal cancer met the revised Bethesda guidelines at the genetic diagnosis, but only 7 of 11 (63.6%) met them at the first cancer. Twelve out of 21 (57.1%) met the revised Amsterdam criteria. Conclusion It took 11 years for the LS probands from the first cancer to the diagnostic confirmation by genetic tests. A quarter of the probands were in their 70s or 80s at genetic diagnosis.

Risk factors and clinical characteristics of early-onset colorectal cancer vs. late-onset colorectal cancer: a case-case study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC), defined as colorectal cancer (CRC) before the age of 50 is increasing in incidence. We evaluated exogenous and endogenous risk factors, and clinical features of eoCRC, compared to late-onset CRC (loCRC).

METHODS

In this retrospective case-case study, patients were prospectively enrolled from 2015 to 2018. We collected clinical features (age, sex, time from symptom onset to diagnosis, symptoms, family history, smoking and alcohol habits, diabetes, BMI, and genetic analysis) and tumor characteristics. Independent risk factors for eoCRC and odds ratios (ORs) were identified.

RESULTS

Fifty-four eoCRCs and 494 loCRCs were enrolled. Patients with eoCRC experienced longer delay time from symptom onset to diagnosis: 40.7% were diagnosed within 6 months from symptoms onset, compared to 85.6% of patients with loCRC (P < 0.0001). They differed for sex, presence of symptoms, family history, smoking habit, alcohol intake, and BMI. Rectal localization was more closely associated with eoCRC (64.8%) than loCRC (34.5%, P < 0.0001). Family history of CRC was associated with eoCRC (OR = 8.8). When family history occurred with hereditary cancer syndromes, the OR for eoCRC increased to 21.

CONCLUSION

In young adults with alarming symptoms, CRC must be suspected to avoid delay time from symptom onset to diagnosis and genetic risk assessment has to be evaluated. Smoking habits, alcohol intake, and BMI are not associated with eoCRC.

Familial pancreatic cancer: who should be considered for genetic testing?

BACKGROUND

Determining how many female patients who underwent breast imaging meet the eligibility criteria for genetic testing for familial pancreatic cancer (FPC).

METHODS

A total of 42,904 patients seen at the Newton-Wellesley Hospital between 2007 and 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. The first four categories were based on pancreatic cancer-associated syndromes: (1) hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), (2) Lynch syndrome (LS), (3) familial atypical multiple mole melanoma (FAMMM), and (4) family history of FPC (FH-FPC). PancPRO (5) and MelaPRO (6) categories were based on risk scores from Mendelian risk prediction tool.

RESULTS

Exactly 4445 of 42,904 patients were found to be in at least one of the six risk categories. About 5.7% of patients were classified as being at high risk for HBOC, 2.3% as being at high risk for LS, 0.1% as being at high risk for FAMMM, 0.1% as being at high risk for FH-FPC, 2.7% as being at high risk based on PancPRO, and 0.2% as being at high risk based on MelaPRO.

CONCLUSION

About 10.4% of the female patients were classified as being at high risk for FPC. This finding emphasizes the importance of applying criteria to the general population, in order to ensure that individuals with high risk are identified early.

Comparison of Colorectal and Endometrial Microsatellite Instability Tumor Analysis and Premm5 Risk Assessment for Predicting Pathogenic Germline Variants on Multigene Panel Testing

PURPOSE

Tumor testing for microsatellite instability and/or mismatch repair-deficiency (MSI/IHC) and clinical prediction models effectively screen for Lynch syndrome (LS)-associated colorectal cancer (CRC) and endometrial cancer (EC), but they have not been assessed for their ability to identify non-LS forms of inherited risk. The aim of this study was to compare MSI/IHC and the PREMM5 prediction model to identify carriers of LS and non-LS pathogenic variants (PVs) among patients with CRC and EC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were retrospectively analyzed from two single-institution cohorts: 706 patients with CRC and/or EC referred for genetic evaluation/testing (high-risk cohort) and 1,058 consecutively ascertained patients with CRC (oncology clinic cohort), unselected for familial risk. All participants underwent germline multigene panel testing. PREMM5 scores were calculated from personal/family cancer history. The primary outcome was the proportion of individuals with germline PVs (LS PVs, high-penetrance PVs, and any PVs) who had abnormal MSI/IHC testing and/or PREMM5 score ≥ 2.5%.

RESULTS

MSI/IHC and PREMM5 had comparable sensitivity for identifying LS carriers in high-risk (89.3% v 85.7%; P = .712) and oncology clinic patients (96.6% v 96.6%; P = 1.000), although MSI/IHC had significantly superior specificity for LS (81.3% v 20.1%; P < .001; 92.3% v 24.3%; P < .001). In both cohorts, PREMM5 had superior sensitivity to MSI/IHC at identifying patients with any high-penetrance PVs and any low-, moderate-, and high-penetrance PVs. Among patients with normal MSI/IHC, PREMM5 identified 84.2% and 83.3% of high-risk patients with CRC/EC and oncology clinic CRC patients with high-penetrance PVs, respectively.

CONCLUSION

MSI/IHC and PREMM5 effectively identify patients with CRC and/or EC with LS, although MSI/IHC has better specificity for LS. Because PREMM5 identifies non-LS, high-penetrance germline PVs, patients with CRC and/or EC with PREMM5 score ≥ 2.5%, including those with normal MSI/IHC, should be offered multigene panel testing.

The first case report of polymerase proofreading-associated polyposis in POLD1 variant, c.1433G>A p.S478N, in Japan

Polymerase proofreading-associated polyposis, caused by germline variants in the exonuclease domains of POLD1 and POLE, is a dominantly inherited rare condition characterized by oligo-adenomatous polyposis and increased risk of colorectal cancer, endometrial cancer and brain tumours. We report the first Japanese case of polymerase proofreading-associated polyposis carrying a POLD1 variant. The proband was a Japanese woman who had undergone resections of early colorectal carcinomas repeatedly and a hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy for endometrial cancer, all of which were diagnosed within 2 years after the first colectomy at 49 year old. Colonoscopic examinations demonstrated at least 14 non-cancerous polypoid lesions, some of which were histologically confirmed to be adenoma. Multigene panel sequencing identified a missense variant in POLD1 (c.1433G>A). Although her relatives did not undergo genetic testing, her father and paternal grandfather died of brain tumours at 53 and ~30 years of age, respectively.

Cost-Effectiveness of Early Detection and Prevention Strategies for Endometrial Cancer-A Systematic Review

Endometrial cancer is the most common female genital tract cancer in developed countries. We systematically reviewed the current health-economic evidence on early detection and prevention strategies for endometrial cancer based on a search in relevant databases (Medline/Embase/Cochrane Library/CRD/EconLit). Study characteristics and results including life-years gained (LYG), quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were summarized in standardized evidence tables. Economic results were transformed into 2019 euros using standard conversion methods (GDP-PPP, CPI). Seven studies were included, evaluating (1) screening for endometrial cancer in women with different risk profiles, (2) risk-reducing interventions for women at increased or high risk for endometrial cancer, and (3) genetic testing for germline mutations followed by risk-reducing interventions for diagnosed mutation carriers. Compared to no screening, screening with transvaginal sonography (TVS), biomarker CA-125, and endometrial biopsy yielded an ICER of 43,600 EUR/LYG (95,800 EUR/QALY) in women with Lynch syndrome at high endometrial cancer risk. For women considering prophylactic surgery, surgery was more effective and less costly than screening. In obese women, prevention using Levonorgestrel as of age 30 for five years had an ICER of 72,000 EUR/LYG; the ICER for using oral contraceptives for five years as of age 50 was 450,000 EUR/LYG. Genetic testing for mutations in women at increased risk for carrying a mutation followed by risk-reducing surgery yielded ICERs below 40,000 EUR/QALY. Based on study results, preventive surgery in mutation carriers and genetic testing in women at increased risk for mutations are cost-effective. Except for high-risk women, screening using TVS and endometrial biopsy is not cost-effective and may lead to overtreatment. Model-based analyses indicate that future biomarker screening in women at increased risk for cancer may be cost-effective, dependent on high test accuracy and moderate test costs. Future research should reveal risk-adapted early detection and prevention strategies for endometrial cancer.

Mutation prevalence tables for hereditary cancer derived from multigene panel testing

Multigene panel testing for cancer predisposition mutations is becoming routine in clinical care. However, the gene content of panels offered by testing laboratories vary significantly, and data on mutation detection rates by gene and by the panel is limited, causing confusion among clinicians on which test to order. Using results from 147,994 multigene panel tests conducted at Ambry Genetics, we built an interactive prevalence tool to explore how differences in ethnicity, age of onset, and personal and family history of different cancers affect the prevalence of pathogenic mutations in 31 cancer predisposition genes, across various clinically available hereditary cancer gene panels. Over 13,000 mutation carriers were identified in this high-risk population. Most were non-Hispanic white (74%, n = 109,537), but also Black (n  = 10,875), Ashkenazi Jewish (n  = 10,464), Hispanic (n  = 10,028), and Asian (n  = 7,090). The most prevalent cancer types were breast (50%), ovarian (6.6%), and colorectal (4.7%), which is expected based on genetic testing guidelines and clinician referral for testing. The Hereditary Cancer Multi-Gene Panel Prevalence Tool presented here can be used to provide insight into the prevalence of mutations on a per-gene and per-multigene panel basis, while conditioning on multiple custom phenotypic variables to include race and cancer type.

Genetic Alterations Featuring Biological Models to Tailor Clinical Management of Pancreatic Cancer Patients

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. This high mortality rate is due to the disease's lack of symptoms, resulting in a late diagnosis. Biomarkers and treatment options for pancreatic cancer are also limited. In order to overcome this, new research models and novel approaches to discovering PDAC biomarkers are required. In this review, we outline the hereditary and somatic causes of PDAC and provide an overview of the recent genome wide association studies (GWAS) and pathway analysis studies. We also provide a summary of some of the systems used to study PDAC, including established and primary cell lines, patient-derived xenografts (PDX), and newer models such as organoids and organ-on-chip. These ex vitro laboratory systems allow for critical research into the development and progression of PDAC.

MSH6 gene pathogenic variant identified in familial pancreatic cancer in the absence of colon cancer

OBJECTIVES

Lynch syndrome is characterized by pathogenetic variants in the mismatch repair genes and autosomal dominant inheritance with incomplete penetrance. Lynch syndrome is characterized by colorectal and, with lesser and variable extent, extracolonic cancers. We describe a family with MSH6-dependent Lynch syndrome and familial pancreatic cancer and other tumours (gastric and endometrial), in the absence of colorectal neoplasia.

METHODS

Patients were analysed by sequencing, Next Generation or Sanger, to identify germinal pathogenic variants in hereditary cancer genes.

RESULTS

We identified the MSH6 gene pathogenic variant c.2194C>T, p.(Arg732Ter) in a family with hereditary pancreatic cancer without diagnosed cases of colorectal adenocarcinoma. Seven family members were affected by the MSH6 pathogenic variant. Three had pancreatic adenocarcinoma at 65, 57 and 44 years; one had endometrial cancer at 36 years. None of the remaining three subjects (75, 45 and 17 years old) had developed any cancer yet.

CONCLUSIONS

Lynch syndrome should be suspected in families with familial pancreatic cancer, even in the absence of colon cancers. Specifically, our observation supports the association between the MSH6 c.2194C>T pathogenic variant and extracolonic tumours and it suggests that MSH6 pathogenic variants are associated with familial pancreatic cancer more frequently than assumed.

Use of Family History and Genetic Testing to Determine Risk of Colorectal Cancer

Approximately 35% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) have a family history of the disease attributed to genetic factors, common exposures, or both. Some families with a history of CRC carry genetic variants that cause CRC with high or moderate penetrance, but these account for only 5% to 10% of CRC cases. Most families with a history of CRC and/or adenomas do not carry genetic variants associated with cancer syndromes; this is called common familial CRC. Our understanding of familial predisposition to CRC and cancer syndromes has increased rapidly due to advances in next-generation sequencing technologies. As a result, there has been a shift from genetic testing for specific inherited cancer syndromes based on clinical criteria alone, to simultaneous testing of multiple genes for cancer-associated variants. We summarize current knowledge of common familial CRC, provide an update on syndromes associated with CRC (including the nonpolyposis and polyposis types), and review current recommendations for CRC screening and surveillance. We also provide an approach to genetic evaluation and testing in clinical practice. Determination of CRC risk based on family cancer history and results of genetic testing can provide a personalized approach to cancer screening and prevention, with optimal use of colonoscopy to effectively decrease CRC incidence and mortality.

Effective Identification of Lynch Syndrome in Gastroenterology Practice

Purpose of review:

Identification of Lynch syndrome is important from an individual patient and public health standpoint. As paradigms for Lynch syndrome diagnosis have shifted in recent years, this review will discuss rationale and limitations for current strategies as well as provide an overview of future directions in the field.

Recent findings:

In recent years, the use of clinical criteria and risk scores for identification of Lynch syndrome have been augmented by universal testing of all newly diagnosed colorectal cancers with molecular methods to screen for mismatch repair deficiency with high sensitivity and specificity. Studies of implementation and outcomes of universal testing in clinical practice have demonstrated significant heterogeneity that results in suboptimal uptake and contributes to disparities in diagnosis. Emerging technologies, such as next-generation sequencing, hold significant promise as a screening strategy for Lynch syndrome.

Summary:

Universal testing for Lynch syndrome is being performed with increasing frequency, although real-world outcomes have demonstrated room for improvement. Future directions in Lynch syndrome diagnosis will involve optimization of universal testing workflow and application of new genetics technologies.

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.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Version 2.2019

Identifying individuals with hereditary syndromes allows for improved cancer surveillance, risk reduction, and optimized management. Establishing criteria for assessment allows for the identification of individuals who are carriers of pathogenic genetic variants. The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provide recommendations for the assessment and management of patients with high-risk colorectal cancer syndromes. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on criteria for the evaluation of Lynch syndrome and considerations for use of multigene testing in the assessment of hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes.

Screening for hereditary cancers in patients with endometrial cancer reveals a high frequency of germline mutations in cancer predisposition genes

As inherited genetic alterations are important etiological factors causing endometrial cancer (EC), our study aimed to outline the ethnic-related prevalence and the associated clinical and biological characteristics of germline mutations in cancer predisposition genes in Chinese EC patients. One hundred ninety-eight Chinese EC patients were screened for germline mutations in a panel of cancer susceptibility genes using next-generation sequencing combined with multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification. First, we found that among patients under 50 years of age, 26% (18/69) carried germline genetic mutations, all involving mismatch repair (MMR) genes except for one mutation affecting BRCA1. Second, when we focused on Lynch syndrome (LS) with additional selected patients, 45 were identified to carry pathogenic mutations in MMR genes, with a higher frequency found in MSH2 and MSH6. We found that age at onset, personal and familial history together with immunohistochemical assay results were the most useful criteria for the diagnosis of LS although limitations in routine practice and the sensitivity and specificity of each parameter should be taken into account. One pathogenic mutation in the PALB2 gene was detected in a patient with no breast cancer in her family. Interestingly, we identified a family carrying pathogenic variant in both PMS2 and BRCA1 genes with distinct clinical phenotypes. Multigene panel testing should be recommended to patients based on their clinical information and tumor phenotype. Our study also showed the genetic complexity in EC, which requires further investigations.

Genetic predisposition to colorectal cancer: syndromes, genes, classification of genetic variants and implications for precision medicine

This article reviews genes and syndromes associated with predisposition to colorectal cancer (CRC), with an overview of gene variant classification. We include updates on the application of preventive and therapeutic measures, focusing on the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and immunotherapy. Germline pathogenic variants in genes conferring high or moderate risk to cancer are detected in 6-10% of all CRCs and 20% of those diagnosed before age 50. CRC syndromes can be subdivided into nonpolyposis and polyposis entities, the most common of which are Lynch syndrome and familial adenomatous polyposis, respectively. In addition to known and novel genes associated with highly penetrant CRC risk, identification of pathogenic germline variants in genes associated with moderate-penetrance cancer risk and/or hereditary cancer syndromes not traditionally linked to CRC may have an impact on genetic testing, counseling, and surveillance. The use of multigene panels in genetic testing has exposed challenges in the classification of variants of uncertain significance. We provide an overview of the main classification systems and strategies for improving these. Finally, we highlight approaches for integrating chemoprevention in the care of individuals with genetic predisposition to CRC and use of targeted agents and immunotherapy for treatment of mismatch repair-deficient and hypermutant tumors. Copyright © 2018 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Lynch Syndrome: From Screening to Diagnosis to Treatment in the Era of Modern Molecular Oncology

Lynch syndrome is a hereditary cancer predisposition syndrome caused by germline alterations in the mismatch repair genes and is the most common etiology of hereditary colorectal cancer. While Lynch syndrome was initially defined by the clinical Amsterdam criteria, these criteria lack the sensitivity needed for clinical utility. This review covers the evolution of screening for Lynch syndrome from the use of tumor microsatellite instability and/or somatic alterations in mismatch repair protein expression by immunohistochemistry to the newest methods using next-generation sequencing. Additionally, it discusses the clinical implications of the diagnosis of Lynch syndrome as it affects cancer therapeutics and the role of screening in noncolorectal Lynch-associated cancers. As molecular oncology continues to evolve, it is crucial to remain current on the increasing complexity of Lynch syndrome diagnostics and treatment options.

Implementation of a Systematic Tumor Screening Program for Lynch Syndrome in an Integrated Health Care Setting

A subset of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases are attributable to Lynch syndrome (LS), a hereditary form of CRC. Effective evaluation for LS can be done on CRC tumors to guide diagnostic testing. Increased diagnosis of LS allows for surveillance and risk reduction, which can mitigate CRC-related burden and prevent cancer-related deaths. We evaluated participation in LS screening among newly diagnosed adult CRC patients. Some cases were referred for genetics evaluation prior to study recruitment (selective screening). Those not referred directly were randomized to the intervention or control (usual care) arms. Control cases were observed for one year, then given information about LS screening. Patients who declined participation were followed through the medical record. Of 601 cases of CRC, 194 (32%) enrolled in our study and were offered LS screening, 43 (7%) were followed as a control group, 148 (25%) declined participation and 216 (36%) were ineligible [63 (10%) of which received prior selective screening]. Six and nine cases of LS were identified through the intervention and selective screening groups, respectively. Overall, a higher proportion of PMS2 variants were identified in the intervention (3/6, 50%) versus selective screening groups (2/9, 22%) (not statistically significant). Eighty-eight percent and 23% of intervention and control patients, respectively, received LS screening. No control patients were found to have LS. Systems-based approaches are needed to ensure we fully identify LS cases. The proportion of LS cases from this program was 4% of newly diagnosed cases of CRC, similar to other programs.

Validation of a digital identification tool for individuals at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes

Background

The number of individuals meeting criteria for genetic counseling and testing for hereditary cancer syndromes (HCS) is far less than the number that actually receive it. To facilitate identification of patients at risk for HCS, Counsyl developed a digital identification tool (digital ID tool) to match personal and family cancer history to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) BRCA-related Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC), Lynch syndrome, and polyposis testing criteria in one-to-one, automated fashion. The purpose of this study was to validate the ability of the digital ID tool to accurately identify histories that do and do not meet NCCN testing criteria.

Methods

Third-party recorded three-generation pedigrees were retrospectively reviewed by a certified genetic counselor (CGC) to determine if independent events included in pedigree histories met NCCN guidelines, and were then sorted into groups: high risk events (meets criteria) and low risk events (does not meet criteria). Events were entered into the digital ID tool to determine the extent of its concordance with events sorted by CGC review. Statistical tests of accuracy were calculated at a 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

One hundred ninety-seven pedigrees were reviewed consecutively representing 765 independent events for analysis across groups. 382/382 (100%) high risk events identified by the digital ID tool and 381/383 (99.47%) low risk events identified by the digital ID tool were concordant with CGC sorting. The digital ID tool had a sensitivity of 100% (99.04–100% CI) and specificity of 99.48% (98.13–99.94% CI). The overall accuracy of the digital ID tool was estimated to be 99.74% (99.06–99.97% CI), reflecting the rate at which the digital ID tool reached the same conclusion as that of CGC review of pedigree events for the recommendation of genetic testing for individuals at risk for HCS.

Conclusions

The digital ID tool accurately matches NCCN criteria in one-to-one fashion to identify at-risk individuals for HCS and may be useful in clinical practice, specifically for BRCA-related HBOC and Lynch Syndrome.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13053-018-0099-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Worldwide Practice Patterns in Lynch Syndrome Diagnosis and Management, Based on Data From the International Mismatch Repair Consortium

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Families with a history of Lynch syndrome often do not adhere to guidelines for genetic testing and screening. We investigated practice patterns related to Lynch syndrome worldwide, to ascertain potential targets for research and public policy efforts.

METHODS

We collected data from the International Mismatch Repair Consortium (IMRC), which comprises major research and clinical groups engaged in the care of families with Lynch syndrome worldwide. IMRC institutions were invited to complete a questionnaire to characterize diagnoses of Lynch syndrome and management practice patterns.

RESULTS

Fifty-five providers, representing 63 of 128 member institutions (49%) in 21 countries, completed the questionnaire. For case finding, 55% of respondents reported participating in routine widespread population tumor testing among persons with newly diagnosed Lynch syndrome-associated cancers, whereas 27% reported relying on clinical criteria with selective tumor and/or germline analyses. Most respondents (64%) reported using multigene panels for germline analysis, and only 28% reported testing tumors for biallelic mutations for cases in which suspected pathogenic mutations were not confirmed by germline analysis. Respondents reported relying on passive dissemination of information to at-risk family members, and there was variation in follow through of genetic testing recommendations. Reported risk management practices varied-nearly all programs (98%) recommended colonoscopy every 1 to 2 years, but only 35% recommended chemoprevention with aspirin.

CONCLUSIONS

There is widespread heterogeneity in management practices for Lynch syndrome worldwide among IMRC member institutions. This may reflect the rapid pace of emerging technology, regional differences in resources, and the lack of definitive data for many clinical questions. Future efforts should focus on the large numbers of high-risk patients without access to state-of-the-art Lynch syndrome management.

Clinicopathologic features of endometrial cancer in Chinese patients younger than 50 years with a family history of cancer

Genetic factors play an important role in shaping the biologic characteristics of malignant tumors, especially in young patients. We aimed to determine the clinicopathologic features of endometrial cancer (EC) in patients younger than 50 years with a family history of cancer.Overall, 229 patients with EC, including 40 with a positive family history of cancer (PFH) and 189 with a negative family history of cancer (NFH), were enrolled in this case-control study. The family history of cancer in a 2-generation pedigree was recorded for the PFH group. Clinicopathologic features such as menarche age, body mass index, personal cancer history, grade, and histologic type were compared between the 2 groups. Mismatch repair (MMR) proteins including MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, and MSH6 were assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in surgical samples. Univariate (Pearson Chi-squared test, Fisher exact test, T test, Wilcoxon rank sum test, logistic regression) statistics and stepwise multivariate logistic regression were used to identify factors associated with PFH in the analysis.Among young patients with EC, the PFH group had younger age-of-onset age of endometrial cancer (≤40 years) (odds ratio [OR] = 2.21, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.01-4.82) than the NFH group. The proportion of overweight/obese patients was high in both the NFH (58.7%) and PFH (80%) groups. Colorectal, lung, endometrial, breast, and hepatocellular carcinoma accounted for 58.6% of all cancer types among 1st- and 2nd-degree relatives. Additionally, 19.2% of patients displayed deficiency in at least 1 MMR protein, with a significantly higher proportion of MMR protein deficiency in the PFH group than in the NFH group (adjusted OR = 4.81, 95% CI: 2.14-8.83).Clinicopathologic features differ for young patients with EC with and without a family history of cancer. Surveillance of age-of-onset and family history of endometrial cancer, reduction of barriers to healthy lifestyles, and development of risk-appropriate Lynch syndrome screening tools, such as IHC, are needed for these women in Shanghai and other developing cities in China.

Universal screening of both endometrial and colon cancers increases the detection of Lynch syndrome

BACKGROUND

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common hereditary cause of colorectal cancer (CRC) and endometrial cancer (EC). Screening of all CRCs for LS is currently recommended, but screening of ECs is inconsistent. The objective of this study was to determine the added value of screening both CRC and EC tumors in the same population.

METHODS

A prospective, immunohistochemistry (IHC)-based screening program for all patients with newly diagnosed CRCs and ECs was initiated in 2011 and 2013, respectively, at 2 centers (primary and tertiary). Genetic testing was recommended for those who had tumors with absent mutS homolog 2 (MSH2), MSH6, or postmeiotoic segregation increased 2 (PMS2) expression and for those who had tumors with absent mutL homolog 1 (MLH1) expression and no v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B (BRAF) mutation or MLH1 promoter methylation. Amsterdam II criteria, revised Bethesda criteria, and scores from prediction models for gene mutations (the PREMM1,2,6 and PREMM5 prediction models) were ascertained in patients with LS.

RESULTS

In total, 1290 patients with CRC and 484 with EC were screened for LS, and genetic testing was recommended for 137 patients (10.6%) and 32 patients (6.6%), respectively (P = .01). LS was identified in 16 patients (1.2%) with CRC and in 8 patients (1.7%) with EC. Among patients for whom genetic testing was recommended, the LS diagnosis rate was higher among those with EC (25.0% vs 11.7%, P = .052). The Amsterdam II criteria, revised Bethesda criteria, and both PREMM calculators would have missed 62.5%, 50.0%, and 12.5% of the identified patients with LS, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Expanding a universal screening program for LS to include patients who had EC identified 50% more patients with LS, and many of these patients would have been missed by risk assessment tools (including PREMM5 ). Universal screening programs for LS should include both CRC and EC. Cancer 2018. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Clinical genetic testing outcome with multi-gene panel in Asian patients with multiple primary cancers

Background

Developing multiple cancers is an indicator of underlying hereditary cancer predisposition, but there is a paucity of data regarding the clinical genetic testing outcomes of these patients.

Methods

We compared cancer index patients with ≥2 primary malignancies versus 1 primary cancer who underwent clinical evaluation and testing with multi-gene panels comprising up to 49 genes from 1998-2016.

Results

Among 1191 cancer index patients, 80.6%, 17.2%, and 2.2% respectively had 1, 2, and ≥3 primary malignancies. For patients with 2 primary cancers (n=205), the most common cancer pairs were bilateral breast (37.5%), breast-ovary (11.7%), endometrium-ovary (9.2%), colon-endometrium (3.9%) and colon-colon (3.4%). 42.3% patients underwent gene testing including 110/231 (47.6%) with multiple malignancies. Pathogenic variants were found more frequently in younger patients, in those with a family history of cancer related to the suspected syndrome, and a trend towards significance in those with multiple primary cancers (35.5% vs. 25.6%, p = 0.09). In patients with multiple cancers, pathogenic variants were most commonly identified in BRCA1 (38.5%), BRCA2 (17.9%), and the mismatch repair genes (20.5%), while 23.1% of pathogenic mutations were in other moderate- to high-penetrance cancer predisposition genes including APC, ATM, MUTYH, PALB2, RAD50 and TP53.

Conclusion

Patients with multiple cancers were more likely to carry pathogenic mutations than those with single cancer. About three-quarters of deleterious mutations in patients with multiple primary cancers were in BRCA1/2 and the mismatch repair genes, but multi-gene panel testing facilitated the detection of mutations in another 6 genes and is warranted in this high-risk population.

Updates on Translational Research on Prevention of Polyps and Colorectal Cancer

Morbidity and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC) can be effectively reduced through early detection and prevention. To date, strategies for managing CRC risk have focused primarily on secondary prevention, through screening asymptomatic individuals for colorectal neoplasia. In the United States, implementation of screening among individuals age ≥50 has led to not only decreased CRC-related mortality but also reduced CRC incidence through colonoscopic removal of precancerous polyps. In contrast to screening's endpoint of early detection, the goal of primary prevention of CRC is to arrest and/or reverse colorectal carcinogenesis. Observational studies and randomized clinical trials continue to examine effects of specific pharmacologic agents (chemoprevention) and dietary interventions on development of advanced colorectal neoplasia. This review will present an overview of strategies for primary and secondary prevention of CRC, including endoscopic, pharmacologic, and dietary interventions.

Germline Genetic Features of Young Individuals With Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in individuals younger than 50 years is increasing. We sought to ascertain the proportion of young CRC cases associated with genetic predisposition.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of individuals diagnosed with CRC at an age younger than 50 years, evaluated by the clinical genetics service at a single tertiary care cancer center from 1998 through 2015. We collected data on patient histories, tumor phenotypes, and results of germline DNA sequencing. For subjects with uninformative clinical evaluations, germline DNA samples were (re)sequenced using a research-based next-generation sequencing multigene panel. The primary outcome was identification of a pathogenic germline mutation associated with cancer predisposition.

RESULTS

Of 430 young CRC cases, 111 (26%) had a first-degree relative with CRC. Forty-one of the subjects with CRC (10%) had tumors with histologic evidence for mismatch repair deficiency. Of 315 subjects who underwent clinical germline sequencing, 79 had mutations associated with a hereditary cancer syndrome and 21 had variants of uncertain significance. Fifty-six subjects had pathogenic variants associated with Lynch syndrome (25 with mutations in MSH2, 24 with mutations in MLH1, 5 with mutations in MSH6, and 2 with mutations in PMS2) and 10 subjects had pathogenic variants associated with familial adenomatous polyposis. Thirteen subjects had mutations in other cancer-associated genes (8 in MUTYH, 2 in SMAD4, 1 in BRCA1, 1 in TP53, and 1 in CHEK2), all identified through multigene panel tests. Among 117 patients with uninformative clinical evaluations, next-generation sequence analysis using a multigene panel detected actionable germline variants in 6 patients (5%). Only 43 of the 85 subjects with germline mutations associated with a hereditary cancer syndrome (51%) reported a CRC diagnosis in a first-degree relative.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 1 in 5 individuals diagnosed with CRC at age younger than 50 years carries a germline mutation associated with cancer; nearly half of these do not have clinical histories typically associated with the identified syndrome. Germline testing with multigene cancer panels should be considered for all young patients with CRC.

Universal screening for Lynch syndrome among patients with colorectal cancer: patient perspectives on screening and sharing results with at-risk relatives

Universal screening for Lynch syndrome (LS) among all cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) could increase the diagnosis of LS and reduce morbidity and mortality of LS-associated cancers. Given universal screening includes all patients, irrespective of high risk factors such early age at onset or family history of CRC, it is important to understand perspectives of all patients and not just those at high risk. As part of a study to assess the feasibility and implementation of universal screening, 189 patients newly diagnosed with CRC were surveyed about their interest in screening for LS and communication of results with at-risk family members. Overall, participants responded positively regarding screening for LS, with most wanting to know their genetic risks in general (86%) and risk of hereditary CRC (93%). Prior to receiving screening results, most participants stated they intended to share their screening results with parents (89%), siblings (96%), and children (96%). Of the 28 participants who received a positive LS screening result, 26 (93%) reported sharing their result with at least one first-degree family member. Interest in screening for LS and communication of screening results with family members was not associated with high risk factors. This study indicates that patients are interested in being screened for LS and that sharing information on the risk of LS with at-risk family members is not a significant barrier. These findings provide novel insight into patient perspectives about screening for LS and can guide successful implementation of universal screening programs.

Which Lynch syndrome screening programs could be implemented in the "real world"? A systematic review of economic evaluations

Purpose

Lynch syndrome (LS) screening can significantly reduce cancer morbidity and mortality in mutation carriers. Our aim was to identify cost-effective LS screening programs that can be implemented in the “real world.”

Methods

We performed a systematic review of full economic evaluations of genetic screening for LS in different target populations; health outcomes were estimated in life-years gained or quality-adjusted life-years.

Results

Overall, 20 studies were included in the systematic review. Based on the study populations, we identified six categories of LS screening program: colorectal cancer (CRC)–based, endometrial cancer–based, general population–based, LS family registry–based, cascade testing–based, and genetics clinic–based screening programs. We performed an in-depth analysis of CRC-based LS programs, classifying them into three additional subcategories: universal, age-targeted, and selective. In five studies, universal programs based on immunohistochemistry, either alone or in combination with the BRAF test, were cost-effective compared with no screening, while in two studies age-targeted programs with a cutoff of 70 years were cost-effective when compared with age-targeted programs with lower age thresholds.

Conclusion

Universal or <70 years–age-targeted CRC-based LS screening programs are cost-effective and should be implemented in the “real world.”

Community Practice Implementation of a Self-administered Version of PREMM1,2,6 to Assess Risk for Lynch Syndrome

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Lynch syndrome is a genetic disorder that greatly increases risk for colorectal and other cancers, although it is underdiagnosed. Prediction of MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6 (PREMM_1,2,6) is a web-based tool that analyzes individuals' personal/family histories of cancer to quantify their likelihood of carrying a germline mutation associated with Lynch syndrome. We investigated the feasibility of systematic risk assessment for Lynch syndrome in a community gastroenterology practice using a patient-completed version of PREMM_1,2,6.

METHODS

PREMM_1,2,6 was adapted into a computer tablet version designed for self-administration by patients. Individuals presenting to a community gastroenterology office and endoscopy facility in California completed the PREMM_1,2,6 assessment before their visit (n = 3134). The total study duration (8 months) comprised a 2-month initiation period (May 1-June 30, 2013) and a 6-month study period (July 1-December 31, 2013). Genetic counseling and germline analysis for mutations in genes associated with Lynch syndrome (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2, and EPCAM) were offered to individuals with PREMM_1,2,6 scores of 5% or higher. Patients and providers completed surveys to evaluate the feasibility and satisfaction with the process.

RESULTS

Of the 3134 individuals assessed by PREMM_1,2,6 during the 6-month study period, 177 individuals (5.6%) had scores of 5% or higher. Of these, 146 individuals underwent genetic testing, along with 28 additional participants recruited nonconsecutively during the initiation period. Mutations associated with Lynch syndrome were detected in 3 of the 146 individuals (2.1%) with PREMM_1,2,6 scores of 5% or higher who underwent germline testing, and 3 of the 28 patients (10.7%) recruited during study initiation with PREMM_1,2,6 scores of 5% or higher. Of the participants who underwent genetic analysis, 98.6% stated that they understood the information provided to them. All of the surveyed providers stated that they were satisfied with the incorporation of PREMM_1,2,6 into their clinical practice, and that they would continue using it to assess risk for Lynch syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS

A patient self-administered version of the PREMM_1,2,6 Lynch syndrome risk assessment model can be used systematically in community-based gastroenterology and endoscopy practices.

Colorectal polyposis and inherited colorectal cancer syndromes

The majority of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases are sporadic, with hereditary factors contributing to approximately 35% of CRC cases. Less than 5% of CRC is associated with a known genetic syndrome. Although adenomatous polyposis syndromes, hamartomatous polyposis syndromes, and those previously classified as non-polyposis CRC syndromes are quite rare, it is important for clinicians to know the characteristics of each syndrome and to understand the differences in cancer risks between the different conditions. This information is very important when treatment and surveillance plans are formulated for each individual patient.

Poor performance of clinical prediction models: the harm of commonly applied methods

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate limitations of common statistical modeling approaches in deriving clinical prediction models and explore alternative strategies.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A previously published model predicted the likelihood of having a mutation in germline DNA mismatch repair genes at the time of diagnosis of colorectal cancer. This model was based on a cohort where 38 mutations were found among 870 participants, with validation in an independent cohort with 35 mutations. The modeling strategy included stepwise selection of predictors from a pool of over 37 candidate predictors and dichotomization of continuous predictors. We simulated this strategy in small subsets of a large contemporary cohort (2,051 mutations among 19,866 participants) and made comparisons to other modeling approaches. All models were evaluated according to bias and discriminative ability (concordance index, c) in independent data.

RESULTS

We found over 50% bias for five of six originally selected predictors, unstable model specification, and poor performance at validation (median c = 0.74). A small validation sample hampered stable assessment of performance. Model prespecification based on external knowledge and using continuous predictors led to better performance (c = 0.836 and c = 0.852 with 38 and 2,051 events respectively).

CONCLUSION

Prediction models perform poorly if based on small numbers of events and developed with common but suboptimal statistical approaches. Alternative modeling strategies to best exploit available predictive information need wider implementation, with collaborative research to increase sample sizes.

Family history in colonoscopy patients: feasibility and performance of electronic and paper-based surveys for colorectal cancer risk assessment in the outpatient setting

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Family history is crucial in stratifying patients' risk for colorectal cancer (CRC). Previous risk assessment tools developed for use in clinic or endoscopy settings have demonstrated suboptimal specificity for identifying patients with hereditary cancer syndromes. Our aim was to test the feasibility and performance of 2 family history surveys (paper and electronic) in individuals presenting for outpatient colonoscopy.

METHODS

Patients presenting for outpatient colonoscopy at a tertiary care center were asked to complete a 5-question paper risk assessment survey (short paper survey) either alone or in conjunction with a second, comprehensive electronic family risk assessment survey (comprehensive tablet survey). Each subject's survey results, along with the electronic medical record, were reviewed, and 10 high-risk criteria and PREMM1,2,6 model scores (a predictive model for carrying a Lynch syndrome-associated gene mutation) were used to identify patients warranting genetic evaluation for suspected hereditary cancer syndromes.

RESULTS

Six hundred patients completed the short paper survey (cohort 1), with an additional 100 patients completing both the short paper and comprehensive tablet survey (cohort 2). Using 10 high-risk criteria and/or a PREMM1,2,6 score ≥5%, we identified 10% and 9% of patients as high risk for CRC in cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. Of the 69 high-risk subjects, 23 (33%) underwent genetic evaluations and 7 (10%) carried germline mutations associated with cancer predisposition. Both patients and endoscopists reported the tools were user-friendly and helpful for CRC risk stratification.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic assessment of family history in colonoscopy patients is feasible and can help endoscopists identify high-risk patients who would benefit from genetic evaluation.

Performance of Lynch syndrome predictive models in quantifying the likelihood of germline mutations in patients with abnormal MLH1 immunoexpression

Lynch syndrome (LS) accounts for up to 4 % of all colorectal cancers (CRC). Detection of a pathogenic germline mutation in one of the mismatch repair genes is the definitive criterion for LS diagnosis, but it is time-consuming and expensive. Immunohistochemistry is the most sensitive prescreening test and its predictive value is very high for loss of expression of MSH2, MSH6, and (isolated) PMS2, but not for MLH1. We evaluated if LS predictive models have a role to improve the molecular testing algorithm in this specific setting by studying 38 individuals referred for molecular testing and who were subsequently shown to have loss of MLH1 immunoexpression in their tumors. For each proband we calculated a risk score, which represents the probability that the patient with CRC carries a pathogenic MLH1 germline mutation, using the PREMM_1,2,6 and MMRpro predictive models. Of the 38 individuals, 18.4 % had a pathogenic MLH1 germline mutation. MMRpro performed better for the purpose of this study, presenting a AUC of 0.83 (95 % CI 0.67-0.9; P < 0.001) compared with a AUC of 0.68 (95 % CI 0.51-0.82, P = 0.09) for PREMM_1,2,6. Considering a threshold of 5 %, MMRpro would eliminate unnecessary germline mutation analysis in a significant proportion of cases while keeping very high sensitivity. We conclude that MMRpro is useful to correctly predict who should be screened for a germline MLH1 gene mutation and propose an algorithm to improve the cost-effectiveness of LS diagnosis.

Genetic counseling and cascade genetic testing in Lynch syndrome

Lynch syndrome is the most common cause of inherited colorectal and endometrial cancers. Individuals with Lynch syndrome have a 10-80 % lifetime risk for colorectal cancer and a 15-60 % lifetime risk for endometrial cancer. Both cancers are preventable through chemoprevention, intensive cancer surveillance, and risk-reducing surgery options. Efforts to identify as many individuals with Lynch syndrome as possible will prevent cancers and save lives. This includes the traditional cancer genetic counseling model whereby individuals with and without cancer are evaluated for a possible Lynch syndrome diagnosis based on their personal and family history of colon polyps and cancers. It also includes universal tumor screening for Lynch syndrome whereby all individuals with colorectal or endometrial cancer are screened for tumor features of Lynch syndrome at the time of diagnosis. Those with tumors suspicious for Lynch syndrome are referred for cancer genetic counseling regardless of their family history of cancer. This two approaches must be maximized to attain high patient reach. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, cascade testing among the at-risk relatives of those diagnosed with Lynch syndrome is critically important to maximize the diagnosis of individuals with Lynch syndrome. In fact, the cost-effectiveness of universal tumor screening for Lynch syndrome relies entirely on counseling and testing as many at-risk individuals as possible since young unaffected individuals stand to benefit the most from an early diagnosis of Lynch syndrome. This approach must be optimized to achieve high family reach. It will take a concerted effort from patients, clinicians and public health officials to improve current approaches to the diagnosis of Lynch syndrome and the prevention and treatment of Lynch syndrome-associated cancer but these lessons can be applied to other conditions as the ultimate example of personalized medicine.

Predictive model for high-frequency microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer patients over 50 years of age

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is an important biomarker for screening for Lynch syndrome, and also of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. The aim of this study is to create a predictive model to determine which elderly patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) should undergo MSI and/or immunohistochemistry testing on the basis of clinicopathological data. We analyzed a test cohort of CRC patients aged ≥50 years (n = 2219) by multivariate logistic regression analyses to identify predictors of high‐frequency MSI (MSI‐H). The created prediction model was validated in an external cohort (n = 992). The frequency of MSI‐H was 5.5% among CRC patients aged ≥ 50 years. The following five predictors of MSI‐H were identified in the test cohort: female (1 point), mucinous component (2 points), tumor size ≥ 60 mm (2 points), location in proximal colon (3 points), and BRAF mutation (6 points). The area under curve (AUC) in the receiver‐operating characteristic (ROC) analysis of this prediction model was 0.832 (95% confidence interval: 0.790–0.874). The sensitivity and specificity were 74.4% and 77.7%, respectively, for a cut‐off score of 4 points. The receiver‐operating characteristic curve of the validation cohort also showed an AUC of 0.856 (95% CI: 0.806–0.905). This prediction model is useful to select elderly CRC patients who should undergo MSI testing, and who may benefit from treatment with 5‐FU‐based adjuvant chemotherapy and cancer immunotherapy.

The current value of determining the mismatch repair status of colorectal cancer: A rationale for routine testing

Colorectal Cancer (CRC) is the third most prevalent cancer in men and women. Up to 15% of CRCs display microsatellite instability (MSI). MSI is reflective of a deficient mismatch repair (MMR) system and is most commonly caused by hypermethylation of the MLH1 promoter. However, it may also be due to autosomal dominant constitutional mutations in DNA MMR, termed Lynch Syndrome. MSI may be diagnosed via polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or alternatively, immunohistochemistry (IHC) can identify MMR deficiency (dMMR). Many institutions now advocate universal tumor screening of CRC via either PCR for MSI or IHC for dMMR to guide Lynch Syndrome testing. The association of sporadic MSI with methylation of the MLH1 promoter and an activating BRAF mutation may offer further exclusion criteria for genetic testing. Aside from screening for Lynch syndrome, MMR testing is important because of its prognostic and therapeutic implications. Several studies have shown MSI CRCs exhibit different clinicopathological features and prognosis compared to microsatellite-stable (MSS) CRCs. For example, response to conventional chemotherapy has been reported to be less in MSI tumours. More recently, MSI tumours have been shown to be responsive to immune-checkpoint inhibition providing a novel therapeutic strategy. This provides a rationale for routine testing for MSI or dMMR in CRC.

Multigene Panel Testing Provides a New Perspective on Lynch Syndrome

Purpose Most existing literature describes Lynch syndrome (LS) as a hereditary syndrome leading to high risks of colorectal cancer (CRC) and endometrial cancer mainly as a result of mutations in MLH1 and MSH2. Most of these studies were performed on cohorts with disease suggestive of hereditary CRC and population-based CRC and endometrial cancer cohorts, possibly biasing results. We aimed to describe a large cohort of mismatch repair (MMR) mutation carriers ascertained through multigene panel testing, evaluate their phenotype, and compare the results with those of previous studies. Methods We retrospectively reviewed clinical histories of patients who had multigene panel testing, including the MMR and EPCAM genes, between March 2012 and June 2015 (N = 34,981) and performed a series of statistical comparisons. Results Overall, MSH6 mutations were most frequent, followed by PMS2, MSH2, MLH1, and EPCAM mutations, respectively. Of 528 patients who had MMR mutations, 63 (11.9%) had breast cancer only and 144 (27.3%) had CRC only. When comparing those with breast cancer only to those with CRC only, MSH6 and PMS2 mutations were more frequent than MLH1 and MSH2 mutations ( P = 2.3 × 10^-5). Of the 528 patients, 22.2% met BRCA1 and BRCA2 ( BRCA1/2) testing criteria and not LS criteria, and 5.1% met neither BRCA1/2 nor LS testing criteria. MSH6 and PMS2 mutations were more frequent than MLH1 and MSH2 mutations among patients who met BRCA1/2 testing criteria but did not meet LS testing criteria ( P = 4.3 × 10^-7). Conclusion These results provide a new perspective on LS and suggest that individuals with MSH6 and PMS2 mutations may present with a hereditary breast and ovarian cancer phenotype. These data also highlight the limitations of current testing criteria in identifying these patients, as well as the need for further investigation of cancer risks in patients with MMR mutations.

Development and Validation of the PREMM5 Model for Comprehensive Risk Assessment of Lynch Syndrome

Purpose Current Lynch syndrome (LS) prediction models quantify the risk to an individual of carrying a pathogenic germline mutation in three mismatch repair (MMR) genes: MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6. We developed a new prediction model, PREMM₅, that incorporates the genes PMS2 and EPCAM to provide comprehensive LS risk assessment. Patients and Methods PREMM₅ was developed to predict the likelihood of a mutation in any of the LS genes by using polytomous logistic regression analysis of clinical and germline data from 18,734 individuals who were tested for all five genes. Predictors of mutation status included sex, age at genetic testing, and proband and family cancer histories. Discrimination was evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and clinical impact was determined by decision curve analysis; comparisons were made to the existing PREMM_1,2,6 model. External validation of PREMM₅ was performed in a clinic-based cohort of 1,058 patients with colorectal cancer. Results Pathogenic mutations were detected in 1,000 (5%) of 18,734 patients in the development cohort; mutations included MLH1 (n = 306), MSH2 (n = 354), MSH6 (n = 177), PMS2 (n = 141), and EPCAM (n = 22). PREMM₅ distinguished carriers from noncarriers with an AUC of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.82), and performance was similar in the validation cohort (AUC, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.92). Prediction was more difficult for PMS2 mutations (AUC, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.68) than for other genes. Performance characteristics of PREMM₅ exceeded those of PREMM_1,2,6. Decision curve analysis supported germline LS testing for PREMM₅ scores ≥ 2.5%. Conclusion PREMM₅ provides comprehensive risk estimation of all five LS genes and supports LS genetic testing for individuals with scores ≥ 2.5%. At this threshold, PREMM₅ provides performance that is superior to the existing PREMM_1,2,6 model in the identification of carriers of LS, including those with weaker phenotypes and individuals unaffected by cancer.

Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The emerging dual imperatives of personalized medicine and technologic advances make population screening for preventable conditions resulting from genetic alterations a realistic possibility. Lynch syndrome is a potential screening target due to its prevalence, penetrance, and the availability of well-established, preventive interventions. However, while population screening may lower incidence of preventable conditions, implementation without evidence may lead to unintentional harms. We examined the literature to determine whether evidence exists that screening for Lynch-associated mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutations leads to improved overall survival, cancer-specific survival, or quality of life. Documenting evidence and gaps is critical to implementing genomic approaches in public health and guiding future research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our 2014-2015 systematic review identified studies comparing screening with no screening in the general population, and controlled studies assessing analytic validity of targeted next-generation sequencing, and benefits or harms of interventions or screening. We conducted meta-analyses for the association between early or more frequent colonoscopies and health outcomes.

RESULTS

Twelve studies met our eligibility criteria. No adequate evidence directly addressed the main question or the harms of screening in the general population. Meta-analyses found relative reductions of 68% for colorectal cancer incidence (relative risk: 0.32, 95% confidence interval: 0.23-0.43, three cohort studies, 590 participants) and 78% for all-cause mortality (relative risk: 0.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.09-0.56, three cohort studies, 590 participants) for early or more frequent colonoscopies among family members of people with cancer who also had an associated MMR gene mutation.

CONCLUSION

Inadequate evidence exists examining harms and benefits of population-based screening for Lynch syndrome. Lack of evidence highlights the need for data that directly compare benefits and harms.