A genetic model for determining MSH2 and MLH1 carrier probabilities based on family history and tumor microsatellite instability

Easy-to-use online referral test detects most patients with a high familial risk of colorectal cancer

AIM

Currently only 12-30% of individuals with a high risk of Lynch syndrome, the most common hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) syndrome, are referred for genetic counselling. We assessed the sensitivity, usability and user experiences of a new online referral test aimed at improving referral of high-risk individuals for genetic counselling.

METHOD

Sensitivity was assessed by entering pedigree data from high-risk individuals (i.e. Lynch syndrome mutation carriers) into the referral test to determine whether genetic counselling was recommended. For usability, we assessed nonmedical staff members' ability to determine referral, according to guidelines, in seven fictive clinical cases using the referral test after minimal training. Real-life users answered questions about their experience with the referral test.

RESULT

Sensitivity of the referral test was 91% for mutation carriers with CRC (n = 164) and 73% for all affected and nonaffected mutation carriers (n = 420). Nonmedical staff members (n = 20) determined referral according to guidelines in 84% of cases using the referral test. Ten per cent (256/2470) of real-life users provided feedback about experiences; of those, 71% reported that the referral test increased reassurance, certainty about their familial risk and/or certainty about referral.

CONCLUSION

The referral test has a high sensitivity in detecting individuals with a high risk of Lynch syndrome and is suitable for use in clinical practice. Widespread use of the referral test should improve cancer prevention in high-risk patients and their relatives.

Criteria and prediction models for mismatch repair gene mutations: a review

One of the strongest predictors of colorectal cancer risk is carrying a germline mutation in a DNA mismatch repair (MMR) gene. Once identified, mutation carriers can be recommended for intensive screening that will substantially reduce their high colorectal cancer risk. Conversely, the relatives of carriers identified as non-carriers can be relieved of the burden of intensive screening. Criteria and prediction models that identify likely mutation carriers are needed for cost-effective, targeted, germline testing for MMR gene mutation. We reviewed 12 criteria/guidelines and 8 prediction models (Leiden, Amsterdam-plus, Amsterdam-alternative, MMRpro, PREMM1,2,6, MMRpredict, Associazione Italiana per lo studio della Familiarità ed Ereditarietà dei tumori Gastrointestinali (AIFEG) and the Myriad Genetics Prevalence table) for identifying mutation carriers. While criteria are only used to identify individuals with colorectal cancer (yes/no for screening followed by germline testing), all prediction models except MMRpredict and Myriad tables can predict the probability of carrying mutations for individuals with or without colorectal cancer. We conducted a meta-analysis of the discrimination performance of 17 studies that validated the prediction models. The pooled estimate for the area under curve was 0.80 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.88) for MMRpro, 0.81 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.88) for MMRpredict, 0.84 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.88) for PREMM, and 0.85 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.91) for Leiden model. Given the high degree of overlap in the CIs, we cannot state that one model has a higher discrimination than any of the others. Overall, the existing statistical models have been shown to be sensitive and specific (at a 5% cut-off) in predicting MMR gene mutation carriers. Future models may need to: provide prediction of PMS2 mutations, take into account a wider range of Lynch syndrome-associated cancers when assessing family history, and be applicable to all people irrespective of any cancer diagnosis.

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.

Integrated analysis of unclassified variants in mismatch repair genes

PURPOSE

Lynch syndrome is a genetic disease that predisposes to colorectal tumors, caused by mutation in mismatch repair genes. The use of genetic tests to identify mutation carriers does not always give perfectly clear results, as happens when an unclassified variant is found. This study aimed to define the pathogenic role of 35 variants present in MSH2, MLH1, MSH6, and PMS2 genes identified in our 15-year case study.

METHODS

We collected clinical and molecular data of all carriers, and then we analyzed the variants pathogenic role with web tools and molecular analyses. Using a Bayesian approach, we derived a posterior probability of pathogenicity and classified each variant according to a standardized five-class system.

RESULTS

The MSH2 p.Pro349Arg, p.Met688Arg, the MLH1 p.Gly67Arg, p.Thr82Ala, p.Lys618Ala, the MSH6 p.Ala1236Pro, and the PMS2 p.Arg20Gln were classified as pathogenic, and the MSH2 p.Cys697Arg and the PMS2 p.Ser46Ile were classified as likely pathogenic. Seven variants were likely nonpathogenic, 3 were nonpathogenic, and 16 remained uncertain.

CONCLUSION

Quantitative assessment of several parameters and their integration in a multifactorial likelihood model is the method of choice for classifying the variants. As such classifications can be associated with surveillance and testing recommendations, the results and the method developed in our study can be useful for helping laboratory geneticists in evaluation of genetic tests and clinicians in the management of carriers.

Clinical genetics of hereditary colorectal cancer

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

Hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer or Lynch syndrome: the gynaecological perspective

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) or Lynch syndrome is characterized by a number of other cancers including colorectal, endometrial and ovarian cancer. This review covers the gynaecological aspects of managing women with HNPCC: diagnostic criteria, molecular tests for diagnosis, cancer risks and different strategies for surveillance and prevention.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies correcting for ascertainment bias found slightly lower penetrance estimates than those obtained from high-risk families. HNPCC linked ovarian cancer presents at an earlier age and stage and has similar survival rates as sporadic cancer. In endometrial tumours, microsatellite instability or immunohistochemistry has limited effectiveness in selecting individuals for genetic testing, due to molecular differences. Population-based data indicate that a significant proportion of mismatch repair gene carriers would be missed by current clinical criteria. Effective risk prediction models complement clinical risk assessment. Effectiveness of screening is unproven and prophylactic surgery is the best preventive option for women who have completed their families. Multimodal screening protocols from the age of 30-35 years are being evaluated.

SUMMARY

Risk of endometrial cancer in women with Lynch syndrome is as high as the risk of colorectal cancer. Further research is needed to identify the appropriate strategy for clinical risk assessment and optimize screening. A multidisciplinary approach is necessary to manage these women.

Prediction of Lynch syndrome in consecutive patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Lynch syndrome is caused by inherited mutations in DNA mismatch repair genes (primarily MSH2, MLH1, MSH6, and PMS2) and is one of the most prevalent inherited cancer syndromes. Several models have been developed to predict the occurrence of Lynch syndrome in high-risk patients and families, but it is not known how these models compare with one another or how they perform for colorectal cancer patients from the general population. We used data from such patients to test the ability of four models--Leiden, MMRpredict, PREMM(1,2), and MMRpro--to distinguish between those who did and did not carry DNA mismatch repair gene mutations.

METHODS

We studied a consecutive series of 725 patients who were younger than 75 years at colorectal cancer diagnosis and whose DNA mismatch repair gene mutation status was available; 18 of the 725 patients carried such a mutation. For each model, we calculated the risk score, compared the observed number of mutations with the expected number, and determined the receiver operating characteristics. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Although all four models overestimated the probability of a mutation (range = 1.2- to 4.3-fold), especially in low-risk patients, they could discriminate between carriers and noncarriers of a mismatch repair mutation. The areas under the receiver operating characteristics curves from the four models ranged from 0.91 to 0.96. Carriers of mutations in the MSH6 or PMS2 genes had lower risk scores than carriers of MSH2 or MLH1 mutations. For example, the MMRpredict model gave median risk scores of 24% and 94% (P < .015) for MSH6-PMS2 and MSH2-MLH1 mutation carriers, respectively. For the Leiden, MMRpredict, and PREMM(1,2) models, correcting the risk scores for bias introduced by family size improved their power to discriminate between carriers and noncarriers. After correcting for family size, the best model was MMRpredict, which achieved a sensitivity of 94% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 73% to 99%) and a specificity of 91% (95% CI = 88% to 93%) and identified a smaller proportion of patients than the revised Bethesda criteria as those who should undergo additional molecular or immunohistochemical testing (11% vs 50%).

CONCLUSION

MMRpredict was the best-performing model for identifying colorectal cancer patients who are at high risk of carrying a DNA mismatch repair gene mutation and thus should be screened for Lynch syndrome.

Mutation spectrum in HNPCC in the Israeli population

Hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer is caused by mutations in DNA mismatch repair genes. The mutation spectrum in the Israeli population is poorly documented except for the c.1906G>C Ashkenazi founder mutation in the hMSH2 gene. To report our experience in HNPCC screening, the mutations detected and the clinical features among a cohort of Israeli patients. Diagnostic work-up was done in a multi-step process guided by clinical and ethnic information. Tumors of suspected patients were tested for microsatellite instability and immunohistochemistry. Based on tumor analyses, we proceeded to mutation screening by DHPLC followed by sequence analysis and multiplex ligase dependent probe amplification. Ashkenazi Jews were first tested for the c.1906G>C founder mutation. Of the 240 families, 24, including Arabs and Jews from different ethnic origins, were tested positive. All tumors that lost expression of mismatch repair proteins also showed microsatellite instability. There was evidence for involvement of hMSH2 (15) hMLH1 (6) and hMSH6 (3) genes. Mutations were identified in 17/24 (71%) patients: 6 Ashkenazi families harbored the c.1906G>C mutation. Eleven other mutations (2 nonsense, 3 splice site and 6 small deletions) were detected. Three of the mutations are novel. No gross deletions or insertions were detected. This is the first report that characterizes the profile of HNPCC in a cohort of patients in Israel. Tumor testing indicated that the 3 main MMR genes are involved, and that mutation spectrum is broad.

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

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

Effectiveness of the CRCAPRO program in identifying patients suspected for HNPCC

Subjects affected by hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer exhibit a high susceptibility to colon and extracolonic tumours, due to MMR gene defects. Revised Bethesda criteria are used to select patients as candidates for genetic tests. Recently, the CRCAPRO model has been developed, based on family history of colorectal and endometrial cancers. Our study aims to evaluate the reliability of CRCAPRO in identifying mutation carriers. We used the CRCAPRO program to evaluate carrier probability risk in 99 patients fulfilling Amsterdam or Bethesda guidelines. MLH1 and MSH2 were studied by direct sequencing in all the 99 patients, and the study of microsatellite instability and of MMR proteins expression was performed. Nine MLH1 and nine MSH2 germline mutations were identified. Five out of the nine patients with MLH1 mutation showed a CRCAPRO risk evaluation of less than 20%. The same happened for four out of nine patients with MSH2 mutation. Of the 17 patients with an estimated risk of more than 80%, only four harboured a mutation, all in the MSH2 gene. The highest risk calculated by the CRCAPRO system in the nine carriers of a MLH1 mutation has been 31.7%. In our experience, the CRCAPRO program sensitivity and specificity appears to be low but needs to be further evaluated in larger samples.