Utility of p16 immunohistochemistry for the identification of Lynch syndrome

Diagnosis of Lynch Syndrome and Strategies to Distinguish Lynch-Related Tumors from Sporadic MSI/dMMR Tumors

Simple Summary

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a hallmark of Lynch syndrome (LS)-related tumors but is not specific, as most of MSI/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) tumors are sporadic. Therefore, the identification of MSI/dMMR requires additional diagnostic tools to identify LS. In this review, we address the hallmarks of LS and present recent advances in diagnostic and screening strategies to identify LS patients. We also discuss the pitfalls associated with current strategies, which should be taken into account in order to improve the diagnosis of LS.

Abstract

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a hallmark of Lynch syndrome (LS)-related tumors but is not specific to it, as approximately 80% of MSI/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) tumors are sporadic. Methods leading to the diagnosis of LS have considerably evolved in recent years and so have tumoral tests for LS screening and for the discrimination of LS-related to MSI-sporadic tumors. In this review, we address the hallmarks of LS, including the clinical, histopathological, and molecular features. We present recent advances in diagnostic and screening strategies to identify LS patients. We also discuss the pitfalls associated with the current strategies, which should be taken into account to improve the diagnosis of LS and avoid inappropriate clinical management.

Prognostic and clinicopathological value of p16 protein aberrant expression in colorectal cancer: A PRISMA-compliant Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Several studies have examined the potential role of p16 protein expression as a diagnostic and prognostic biomarker in various cancers. However, it remains unclear whether p16 protein expression is a prognostic and diagnostic factor for colorectal cancer. Therefore, this meta-analysis is conducted to evaluate the associations of p16 protein expression with overall survival (OS) and clinicopathological characteristics of colorectal cancer.

METHODS

According to PRISMA guideline, relevant literatures were identified by searching Medicine, Web of Science, WanFang, and CNKI databases. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted from included studies to assess the association between p16 protein expression and OS of patients with colorectal cancer. Other relevant data were extracted to evaluate the correlations of p16 protein expression with risk and clinicopathological characteristics of colorectal cancer. Stata 12.0 software was applied to calculate the strength of association between p16 protein expression and colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

Forty-one studies were included to evaluate the association between p16 protein expression and colorectal cancer. Nine studies involving 1731 patients with colorectal cancer found that there was no association between p16 protein expression and OS of colorectal cancer in the overall analysis (HR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.55-1.10). However, p16 protein overexpression was significantly associated with a better prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer when cut-off value of p16 protein expression was <10% (HR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.08-0.66). The results of subgroup analysis based on ethnicity indicated that p16 protein overexpression was a risk factor for the occurrence of colorectal cancer in Caucasians (odds ratio = 28.95, 95% CI: 6.08-137.89), but not in Asians. Furthermore, p16 protein overexpression was significantly associated with the Dukes stage, lymph node metastasis, tumor location, and Tumor Lymph Node Metastasis-stage of colorectal cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

p16 protein overexpression might be a useful biomarker to predict the clinicopathological progress and prognosis of colorectal cancer.

Multi-Gene Expression in Anthracosis of the Lungs as One of the Risk Factors for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Background: Anthracosis of the lung occurs due to the deposition of carbon and silica in the mucosa and submucosa, manifested as black lesions. The association of anthracosis with lung cancer has remained to be clearly elucidated The current study aimed to assess the P16, CDH1 and LUNX genes expression level to evaluate the association of anthracotic lesions in the lungs with the occurrence of non-small cell lung cancer. Methods: Forty biopsy samples were taken from the center and 40 from the margins of black anthracotic lesions in the lungs; RNA was extracted from the samples and cDNA was synthesized. Real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was performed to assess the expression of P16, CDH1 and LUNX genes. All steps were performed in triplicate. Results: A significant reduction in P16 gene expression was noted at the center compared to the margins of the lesions (P<0.001). expression level of CDH1 at the center of lesions was significantly lower than margins (P<0.001). However, LUNX gene had significantly higher expressionlevel at the center compared to margins (P<0.001). Conclusion: Decreased expression of P16 and CDH1 and increased expression of LUNX tumor genes were noted at the center of anthracotic lesions. Significant increase in expression of LUNX gene in NSCLC indicates an association between anthracosis and NSCLC, according to which, anthracotic patients may carry a high risk for NSCLC.

Immunohistochemical staining for p16 and BRAFV600E is useful to distinguish between sporadic and hereditary (Lynch syndrome-related) microsatellite instable colorectal carcinomas

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) protein analysis by immunohistochemistry (IHC) can identify colorectal cancer (CRC) with microsatellite instability (MSI). As MLH1-deficient CRC can be hereditary or sporadic, markers to distinguish between them are needed. MLH1 promoter methylation assay is the reference method; however, sometimes, it is challenging on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples. We assessed by IHC the expression of BRAFV600E, p16, MGMT, and CDX2 in 55 MLH1-deficient MSI CRC samples (of which 8 had a germline MLH1 mutation) to determine whether this panel differentiates between sporadic and hereditary CRCs. We also analyzed MLH1 promoter methylation by methylation-specific PCR and pyrosequencing and BRAF status by genotyping. None of the hereditary CRCs showed MLH1 methylation, BRAF mutation, BRAFV600E-positive immunostaining, or loss of p16 expression. We detected MLH1 promoter methylation in 67 % and a BRAF mutation in 42 % of CRC, all showing MLH1 promoter methylation. BRAFV600E IHC and BRAF genotyping gave concordant results in all but two samples. Loss of expression of p16 was found in 30 % of CRC with methylation of the MLH1 promoter, but its expression was retained in all non-methylated and part of MLH1-methylated tumors (100 % specificity, 30 % sensitivity). CDX2 and MGMT expression was not associated with MLH1 status. Thus, BRAFV600E and p16 IHC may help in differentiating sporadic from hereditary MLH1-deficient CRC with MSI. Specifically, p16 IHC might be used as a surrogate marker for MLH1 promoter methylation, because all p16-negative CRCs displayed MLH1 methylation, whereas hereditary CRCs were all p16-positive.

Sebaceous neoplasms and the immunoprofile of mismatch-repair proteins as a screening target for syndromic cases

INTRODUCTION

Muir-Torre syndrome (MTS), a subset of Lynch syndrome, is characterized by concurrent or sequential development of sebaceous neoplasms, and internal malignancies, specifically colorectal carcinoma (CRC), and can be related to mismatch-repair (MMR)-protein deficiency. In CRC context, p16-negativity in MLH1-deficient cases may denote methylation rather than mutation. The prime aim of this study was to evaluate the mismatch-repair (MMR)-protein deficiency and the p16 status among sebaceous neoplasms.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

From January 1990 through October 2012, 26 sebaceous adenomas (SAs) and 6 sebaceous carcinomas (SCs) were accrued. The expression of MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 was recorded. MLH1-deficient cases were tested for p16 status.

RESULTS

Eighteen (56%) of the 32 specimens with SA or SC displayed MMR-protein deficiency, comprising 17 (65.4%) SAs (MSH2/MSH6 loss in 12, MLH1/PMS2 loss in 3, MSH6 loss only in 2 cases) and 1 (16.7%) SC (MLH1/PMS2 loss). All 4 MLH1 deficient cases were p16-positive.

CONCLUSION

A substantial proportion of sebaceous neoplasms were MMR-protein deficient and thus likely MTS candidates. Given the low prevalence of sebaceous neoplasms in Denmark, immunohistochemistry for the four MMR-proteins is recommended in the initial diagnostic approach. The addition of p16 was none-informative, but evaluation of its utility in larger series is warranted.

Identification of Lynch syndrome among patients with colorectal cancer

CONTEXT

Lynch syndrome is the most common form of hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) and is caused by germline mutations in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes. Identification of gene carriers currently relies on germline analysis in patients with MMR-deficient tumors, but criteria to select individuals in whom tumor MMR testing should be performed are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To establish a highly sensitive and efficient strategy for the identification of MMR gene mutation carriers among CRC probands.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS

Pooled-data analysis of 4 large cohorts of newly diagnosed CRC probands recruited between 1994 and 2010 (n = 10,206) from the Colon Cancer Family Registry, the EPICOLON project, the Ohio State University, and the University of Helsinki examining personal, tumor-related, and family characteristics, as well as microsatellite instability, tumor MMR immunostaining, and germline MMR mutational status data.

MAIN OUTCOME

Performance characteristics of selected strategies (Bethesda guidelines, Jerusalem recommendations, and those derived from a bivariate/multivariate analysis of variables associated with Lynch syndrome) were compared with tumor MMR testing of all CRC patients (universal screening).

RESULTS

Of 10,206 informative, unrelated CRC probands, 312 (3.1%) were MMR gene mutation carriers. In the population-based cohorts (n = 3671 probands), the universal screening approach (sensitivity, 100%; 95% CI, 99.3%-100%; specificity, 93.0%; 95% CI, 92.0%-93.7%; diagnostic yield, 2.2%; 95% CI, 1.7%-2.7%) was superior to the use of Bethesda guidelines (sensitivity, 87.8%; 95% CI, 78.9%-93.2%; specificity, 97.5%; 95% CI, 96.9%-98.0%; diagnostic yield, 2.0%; 95% CI, 1.5%-2.4%; P < .001), Jerusalem recommendations (sensitivity, 85.4%; 95% CI, 77.1%-93.6%; specificity, 96.7%; 95% CI, 96.0%-97.2%; diagnostic yield, 1.9%; 95% CI, 1.4%-2.3%; P < .001), and a selective strategy based on tumor MMR testing of cases with CRC diagnosed at age 70 years or younger and in older patients fulfilling the Bethesda guidelines (sensitivity, 95.1%; 95% CI, 89.8%-99.0%; specificity, 95.5%; 95% CI, 94.7%-96.1%; diagnostic yield, 2.1%; 95% CI, 1.6%-2.6%; P < .001). This selective strategy missed 4.9% of Lynch syndrome cases but resulted in 34.8% fewer cases requiring tumor MMR testing and 28.6% fewer cases undergoing germline mutational analysis than the universal approach.

CONCLUSION

Universal tumor MMR testing among CRC probands had a greater sensitivity for the identification of Lynch syndrome compared with multiple alternative strategies, although the increase in the diagnostic yield was modest.

p16 expression as a surrogate marker for HPV-related oropharyngeal carcinoma: a guide for interpretative relevance and consistency

Recent studies of oropharyngeal carcinoma have reported remarkable correlation between integrated human papillomavirus (HPV) viral detection and p16 protein overexpression in tumor cells. These findings led to calls for the substitution of p16 expression for the more demanding HPV testing in clinical practice. The rationale for such practice is largely driven by the simplicity, low cost, and the feasibility of the immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis. There are, however, several caveats that need to be fully considered. These include the subjective nature of IHC evaluation, the variable mechanisms of p16 expression in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, and the lack of scoring and interpretive criteria. This perspective addresses the conceptual and practical issues associated with the p16 expression analysis and provides a broad outline for its application and evaluation in patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma.

Prognostic significance of CDKN2A (p16) promoter methylation and loss of expression in 902 colorectal cancers: Cohort study and literature review

A cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor CDKN2A (p16/Ink4a) is a tumor suppressor and upregulated in cellular senescence. CDKN2A promoter methylation and gene silencing are associated with the CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) in colon cancer. However, prognostic significance of CDKN2A methylation or loss of CDKN2A (p16) expression independent of CIMP status remains uncertain. Using a database of 902 colorectal cancers in 2 independent cohort studies (the Nurses' Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study), we quantified CDKN2A promoter methylation and detected hypermethylation in 269 tumors (30%). By immunohistochemistry, we detected loss of CDKN2A (p16) expression in 25% (200/804) of tumors. We analyzed for LINE-1 hypomethylation and hypermethylation at 7 CIMP-specific CpG islands (CACNA1G, CRABP1, IGF2, MLH1, NEUROG1, RUNX3 and SOCS1); microsatellite instability (MSI); KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA mutations; and expression of TP53 (p53), CTNNB1 (β-catenin), CDKN1A (p21), CDKN1B (p27), CCND1 (cyclin D1), FASN (fatty acid synthase) and PTGS2 (cyclooxygenase-2). CDKN2A promoter methylation and loss of CDKN2A (p16) were associated with shorter overall survival in univariate Cox regression analysis [hazard ratio (HR): 1.36, 95% CI: 1.10-1.66, p = 0.0036 for CDKN2A methylation; HR: 1.30, 95% CI: 1.03-1.63, p = 0.026 for CDKN2A (p16) loss] but not in multivariate analysis that adjusted for clinical and tumor variables, including CIMP, MSI and LINE-1 methylation. Neither CDKN2A promoter methylation nor loss of CDKN2A (p16) was associated with colorectal cancer-specific mortality in uni- or multivariate analysis. Despite its well-established role in carcinogenesis, CDKN2A (p16) promoter methylation or loss of expression in colorectal cancer is not independently associated with patient prognosis.

Expression of p16 in lymph node metastases of adjuvantly treated stage III colorectal cancer patients identifies poor prognostic subgroups: a retrospective analysis of biomarkers in matched primary tumor and lymph node metastases

BACKGROUND

The objective of identifying protein biomarkers for patients with stage III and IV colorectal cancer is to improve risk stratification and, thus, to identify patients in the postoperative setting who may benefit from more targeted treatment. The objective of the current study was to determine the prognostic value of 19 protein markers assessed in primary tumors and matched lymph node (LN) metastases from patients with stage III and IV colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Matched primary tumors and LN metastases from 82 patients with stage III and IV colorectal cancer were mounted onto a multiple-punch tissue microarray and were stained for 19 protein markers involved in tumor progression (β-catenin, E-cadherin, epidermal growth factor receptor, phosphorylated extracellular signal-regulated kinase [pERK], receptor for hyaluronic acid-mediated motility, phosphorylated protein kinase B, p21, p16, B-cell lymphoma 2, Ki67, apoptotic protease activating factor 1, mammalian sterile 20-like kinase 1, Raf kinase inhibitor protein, vascular endothelial growth factor, ephrin type-B receptor 2, matrix metalloproteinase 7, laminin5γ2, mucin 1 [MUC1], and caudal-related homeobox 2). The prognostic effects of biomarkers in both primary tumor and positive LNs were assessed.

RESULTS

MUC1, pERK and p16 in LN (P=.002, P=.014, and P=.002, respectively) had independent prognostic value. In patients with stage III disease who received adjuvant treatment, negative p16 expression was associated with highly unfavorable outcomes overall (hazard ratio [HR], 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1-0.6; P=.005) when the analysis was stratified by pathologic tumor classification (HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.1-0.7; P=.005), age (HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.1-0.6; P=.004), and LN ratio (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.1-0.7; P=.007); and, in multivariate analysis, it was associated with performance status and the receipt of folic acid treatment (HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.09-0.89; P=.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The loss of p16 in LN metastases contributed to adverse outcomes in adjuvantly treated patients with stage III colorectal cancer independent of pathologic tumor classification, age, LN ratio, performance status, or folic acid treatment. The current results support the investigation of p16 as a prognostic and potential predictive biomarker for future randomized trials of patients with stage III colorectal cancer.

Clinicopathological and protein characterization of BRAF- and K-RAS-mutated colorectal cancer and implications for prognosis

Recent evidence highlights the potential prognostic and predictive value of BRAF and K-RAS gene alterations in patients with colorectal cancer. However, a comprehensive evaluation of BRAF and K-RAS mutations and their specific clinicopathological features, histomorphological presentation and effect on protein expression have not been systematically analyzed. The aim of this study was to characterize the clinicopathological, histomorphological and protein expression profiles of BRAF- and K-RAS-mutated colorectal cancers and determine their impact on patient survival. Molecular analysis for microsatellite instability (MSI), K-RAS and BRAF was carried out on paraffin-embedded samples from 404 patients with primary colorectal cancer. Using tissue microarrays, 36 tumor-associated and 14 lymphocyte/inflammatory-associated markers were evaluated by immunohistochemistry. BRAF mutation was associated with right-sided tumor location (p < 0.001), higher tumor grade (p = 0.029), absence of peritumoral lymphocytic inflammation (p = 0.026) and MSI-H (p < 0.001). In right-sided tumors, loss of CDX2 expression was observed in 23 of 24 cases (95.8%). BRAF mutation was a poor prognostic indicator in patients with right-sided disease (p = 0.01). This result was maintained in multivariable analysis (p < 0.001; HR = 2.82; 95% CI: 1.5-5.5) with pT, pN and vascular invasion and independent of CDX2 expression. K-RAS mutation, in contrast, was not associated with any of the features analyzed. BRAF gene mutation is an adverse prognostic factor in right-sided colon cancer patients independent of MSI status and, moreover, in patients with lymph node-negative disease. These results indicate that molecular analysis for BRAF may be a useful biomarker for identifying patients with right-sided colon cancer with poor outcome who may benefit from a more individualized course of therapy.

Report from the Jerusalem workshop on Lynch syndrome-hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer

A Workshop was held in Jerusalem, Israel, on October 26 and 27, 2009 to discuss the management of Lynch syndrome-hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (CRC), with the primary goal to develop consensus for the optimal management of this disease. A second goal was to identify areas of research with the potential to advance the clinical management of Lynch syndrome. The perspectives and recommendations from the workshop are meant to be a platform for discussion and deliberation. The Workshop was organized by Moshe Shike (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York) and sponsored by The Colon Cancer Foundation. More details of each presentation are available in an on-line supplement.

Methylation analysis of MLH1 improves the selection of patients for genetic testing in Lynch syndrome

Inactivation of MLH1 due to promoter hypermethylation strongly suggests a sporadic origin, providing exclusion criteria for Lynch syndrome. The aim of this study is to compare the utility of methylation analysis of MLH1 and BRAF V600E mutations for the selection of patients with MLH1 negative colorectal cancer for genetic testing. MLH1 methylation status was evaluated by MethyLight and methylation-specific MLPA (MS-MLPA) in tumor DNA from 73 colorectal cancer patients with loss of MLH1 protein expression. These tumors were analyzed for BRAF V600E mutations, and genetic testing for germline MLH1 mutations was performed in all corresponding patients. Ten patients had germline mutations in MLH1 and none of their tumors showed significant MLH1 methylation or BRAF V600E mutation. MLH1 genetic testing excluded patients by MethyLight in 47 patients (64%), by MS-MLPA in 49 (67%), and BRAF V600E mutation in only 25 patients (34%) (chi(2) P = 0.00001). Specificity was 75% for MethyLight, 78% for MS-MLPA and 40% for BRAF V600E mutation. The use of MethyLight or MS-MLPA instead of BRAF mutation resulted in a cost reduction of 41% and 45%, respectively, per every MLH1 mutation detected. Taken together, methylation analysis of MLH1 shows better performance characteristics than BRAF V600E mutation in the selection of patients for genetic testing of MLH1, especially when using MS-MLPA.