Population-based screening for Lynch syndrome in Western Australia

From the patient to the population: Use of genomics for population screening

Genomic medicine is expanding from a focus on diagnosis at the patient level to prevention at the population level given the ongoing under-ascertainment of high-risk and actionable genetic conditions using current strategies, particularly hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), Lynch Syndrome (LS) and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). The availability of large-scale next-generation sequencing strategies and preventive options for these conditions makes it increasingly feasible to screen pre-symptomatic individuals through public health-based approaches, rather than restricting testing to high-risk groups. This raises anew, and with urgency, questions about the limits of screening as well as the moral authority and capacity to screen for genetic conditions at a population level. We aimed to answer some of these critical questions by using the WHO Wilson and Jungner criteria to guide a synthesis of current evidence on population genomic screening for HBOC, LS, and FH.

Lynch syndrome testing of colorectal cancer patients in a high-income country with universal healthcare: a retrospective study of current practice and gaps in seven australian hospitals

BACKGROUND

To inform effective genomic medicine strategies, it is important to examine current approaches and gaps in well-established applications. Lynch syndrome (LS) causes 3-5% of colorectal cancers (CRCs). While guidelines commonly recommend LS tumour testing of all CRC patients, implementation in health systems is known to be highly variable. To provide insights on the heterogeneity in practice and current bottlenecks in a high-income country with universal healthcare, we characterise the approaches and gaps in LS testing and referral in seven Australian hospitals across three states.

METHODS

We obtained surgery, pathology, and genetics services data for 1,624 patients who underwent CRC resections from 01/01/2017 to 31/12/2018 in the included hospitals.

RESULTS

Tumour testing approaches differed between hospitals, with 0-19% of patients missing mismatch repair deficiency test results (total 211/1,624 patients). Tumour tests to exclude somatic MLH1 loss were incomplete at five hospitals (42/187 patients). Of 74 patients with tumour tests completed appropriately and indicating high risk of LS, 36 (49%) were missing a record of referral to genetics services for diagnostic testing, with higher missingness for older patients (0% of patients aged ≤ 40 years, 76% of patients aged > 70 years). Of 38 patients with high-risk tumour test results and genetics services referral, diagnostic testing was carried out for 25 (89%) and identified a LS pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant for 11 patients (44% of 25; 0.7% of 1,624 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the LS testing and referral gaps, further work is needed to identify strategies for successful integration of LS testing into clinical care, and provide a model for hereditary cancers and broader genomic medicine. Standardised reporting may help clinicians interpret tumour test results and initiate further actions.

Worldwide prevalence of Lynch syndrome in patients with colorectal cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) syndrome, with an estimated prevalence of 2% to 3% of CRC. A prevalence study is needed to provide accurate estimates of the true prevalence of LS.

METHODS

MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, and Web of Science were searched. Prevalence was calculated by random effects meta-analysis models. I² score was used to assess heterogeneity across studies. Meta-regression was performed for between-study variance.

RESULTS

A total of 51 studies were included in this review. The overall pooled yield of LS screening was 2.2% based on all methods of detection. Studies performing germline tests on all participants with CRC reported higher prevalence (5.1%) as opposed to studies only performing germline tests on participants with tumors with mismatch repair deficiency (1.6%) or microsatellite instability (1.1%). Selected cohorts of CRC had a higher prevalence of germline LS diagnoses.

CONCLUSION

LS prevalence across multiple ethnic, geographic, and clinical populations is remarkably similar. Universal germline testing of patients presenting with cancer identifies that most CRCs are attributed to LS. Young patients presenting with CRC and those who fulfill criteria for a familial risk provide the highest returns for LS identification. Our study supports the universal germline CRC screening for LS.

Characterisation of heterozygous PMS2 variants in French patients with Lynch syndrome

BACKGROUND

Heterozygous germline PMS2 variants are responsible for about 5% of Lynch syndrome (LS) but their prevalence is most likely underestimated because of complicated routine screening caused by highly homologous pseudogenes. Consequently, there is limited knowledge on the implication of the PMS2 gene in LS.

METHODS

We report 200 PMS2 heterozygous variants identified in 195 French patients, including 112 unique variants classified as class-3/4/5.

RESULTS

Genomic rearrangements account for 18% of alterations. The c.137G>T variant was observed in 18% of the patients, but a founder effect could not be clearly identified by haplotype analysis. Among class-4/5 variant carriers, the median age at first tumour onset was 49 years with a predominance of colorectal (80%) and endometrial (8.1%) cancers. Seven patients developed colorectal cancers before the age of 30 with the youngest at the age of 21. Only 6.2% of class-4/5 carriers had a family history fulfilling Amsterdam I/II criteria among patients with available data. Tumours from PMS2 variant carriers exhibited microsatellite instability (96%) and loss of PMS2 expression (76%), confirming the high predictive value of somatic analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide further insight into the role of the PMS2 gene in LS. While PMS2 variants are mostly detected in families not fulfilling Amsterdam criteria, which supports their lower penetrance, they can nevertheless cause early-onset cancers, highlighting the variability of their penetrance.

Current Genetic Service Delivery Models for the Provision of Genetic Testing in Europe: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Background: The provision of genetic services, along with research in the fields of genomics and genetics, has evolved in recent years to meet the increasing demand of consumers interested in prediction of genetic diseases and various inherited traits. The aim of this study is to evaluate genetic services in order to identify and classify delivery models for the provision of genetic testing in European and in extra-European countries. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted using five electronic resources. Inclusion criteria were that studies be published in English or Italian during the period 2000-2015 and carried out in European or extra-European countries (Canada, USA, Australia, or New Zealand). Results: 148 genetic programs were identified in 117 articles and were delivered mostly in the UK (59, 40%), USA (35, 24%) or Australia (16, 11%). The programs were available nationally (66; 45%), regionally (49; 33%) or in urban areas (21, 14%). Ninety-six (64%) of the programs were integrated into healthcare systems, 48 (32.21%) were pilot programs and five (3%) were direct-to-consumer genetic services. The genetic tests offered were mainly for BRCA1/2 (59, 40%), Lynch syndrome (23, 16%), and newborn screening (18, 12%). Healthcare professionals with different backgrounds are increasingly engaged in the provision of genetic services. Based on which healthcare professionals have prominent roles in the respective patient care pathways, genetic programs were classified into five models: (i) the geneticists model; (ii) the primary care model; (iii) the medical specialist model; (iv) the population screening programs model; and (v) the direct-to-consumer model. Conclusions: New models of genetic service delivery are currently under development worldwide to address the increasing demand for accessible and affordable services. These models require the integration of genetics into all medical specialties, collaboration among different healthcare professionals, and the redistribution of professional roles. An appropriate model for genetic service provision in a specific setting should ideally be defined according to the type of healthcare system, the genetic test provided within a genetic program, and the cost-effectiveness of the intervention. Only applications with proven efficacy and cost-effectiveness should be implemented in healthcare systems and made available to all citizens.

A Pragmatic Testing-Eligibility Framework for Population Mutation Screening: The Example of BRCA1/2

BACKGROUND

Eligibility guidelines for genetic testing may be revisited, given technological advances, plummeting costs, and proposals for population mutation screening. A key property of eligibility criteria is the tradeoff between the number of mutation carriers identified versus population members tested. We assess the fractions of mutation carriers identified, versus women undergoing mutation testing, for BRCA1/2 founder mutation screening in U.S. Ashkenazi-Jewish women.

METHODS

BRCA1/2 carrier probabilities, based on personal/family history, were calculated using the risk-prediction tool BRCAPRO for 4,589 volunteers (102 mutation carriers) in the population-based Washington Ashkenazi Study. For each carrier-probability threshold between 0% and 10%, we compared the percentage of founder mutations detected versus the percentage of women requiring mutation testing. PCR mutation testing was conducted at the NIH for the 3 Ashkenazi-Jewish founder mutations (5382insC and 185delAG in BRCA1, and 6174delT in BRCA2).

RESULTS

Identifying 90% of BRCA1/2 founder mutations required testing the 60% of Ashkenazi-Jewish women with carrier probabilities exceeding 0.56%, potentially avoiding mutation testing for approximately 0.7 to 1.1 million U.S. Ashkenazi-Jewish women. Alternatively, testing the 44% whose carrier probability exceeded 0.78% identified 80% of mutation carriers, increasing to 89% of mutation carriers when accounting for cascade testing triggered after mutation-positive daughters were identified by screening. We present data on all carrier-probability thresholds, e.g., a 5% threshold identified 46% of mutation carriers while testing 10% of women.

CONCLUSIONS

Different carrier-probability thresholds offered diverse tradeoffs between numbers of identified mutation carriers versus women tested. Low carrier-probability thresholds identified 90% of BRCA1/2 founder mutation carriers, without testing approximately 1 million U.S. Ashkenazi-Jewish women with lowest carrier probabilities.

IMPACT

In general, this risk-based framework could provide useful new options to consider during eligibility-criteria development for population mutation screening.

Current mismatch repair deficiency tumor testing practices and capabilities: A survey of Australian pathology providers

AIM & METHODS

An electronic survey of the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia accredited pathology services was conducted to assess Lynch syndrome tumor screening practices and to identify barriers and capabilities to screen newly diagnosed colorectal and endometrial tumors in Australia.

RESULTS

Australia lacks a national policy for universal mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) testing of incident colorectal and endometrial tumors cases. Routine Lynch syndrome tumor screening program for colorectal and/or endometrial tumors was applied by 95% (37/39) of laboratories. Tumor dMMR screening methods varied; MMR protein immunohistochemistry (IHC) alone was undertaken by 77% of 39 laboratories, 18% performed both IHC and microsatellite instability testing, 5% did not have the capacity to perform in-house testing. For colorectal tumors, 47% (17/36) reported following a universal approach without age limit, 30% (11/36) tested only "red flag" cases; 6% (3/36) on clinician request only. For endometrial tumors, 37% (12/33) reported clinician request generated testing, 27% (9/33) were screening only "red flag" cases, and 12% (4/33) carried out universal screening without an age criteria. BRAF V600E mutation testing of colorectal tumors demonstrating aberrant MLH1 protein expression by IHC was the most common secondary tumor test, with 53% of laboratories performing the test; 15% of laboratories also applied the BRAF V600E test to endometrial tumors with aberrant MLH1 expression despite no evidence for its utility. Tumor testing for MLH1 promoter methylation was performed by less than 15% laboratories.

CONCLUSION

Although use of tumor screening for evidence of dMMR is widely available, protocols for its use in Australia vary widely. This national survey provides a snapshot of the current availability and practice of tumor dMMR screening and identifies the need for a uniform national testing policy.

Costs and outcomes of Lynch syndrome screening in the Australian colorectal cancer population

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Individuals with Lynch syndrome (LS) are at increased risk of LS-related cancers including colorectal cancer (CRC). CRC tumor screening for mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency is recommended in Australia to identify LS, although its cost-effectiveness has not been assessed. We aim to determine the cost-effectiveness of screening individuals with CRC for LS at different age-at-diagnosis thresholds.

METHODS

We developed a decision analysis model to estimate yield and costs of LS screening. Age-specific probabilities of LS diagnosis were based on Australian data. Two CRC tumor screening pathways were assessed (MMR immunohistochemistry followed by MLH1 methylation (MLH1-Pathway) or BRAF V600E testing (BRAF-Pathway) if MLH1 expression was lost) for four age-at-diagnosis thresholds-screening < 50, screening < 60, screening < 70, and universal screening.

RESULTS

Per 1000 CRC cases, screening < 50 identified 5.2 LS cases and cost $A7041 per case detected in the MLH1-Pathway. Screening < 60 increased detection by 1.5 cases for an incremental cost of $A25 177 per additional case detected. Screening < 70 detected 1.6 additional cases at an incremental cost of $A40 278 per additional case detected. Compared with screening < 70, universal screening detected no additional LS cases but cost $A158 724 extra. The BRAF-Pathway identified the same number of LS cases for higher costs.

CONCLUSIONS

The MLH1-Pathway is more cost-effective than BRAF-Pathway for all age-at-diagnosis thresholds. MMR immunohistochemistry tumor screening in individuals diagnosed with CRC aged < 70 years resulted in higher LS case detection at a reasonable cost. Further research into the yield of LS screening in CRC patients ≥ 70 years is needed to determine if universal screening is justified.

Disruption of a -35 kb Enhancer Impairs CTCF Binding and MLH1 Expression in Colorectal Cells

Purpose:MLH1 is a major tumor suppressor gene involved in the pathogenesis of Lynch syndrome and various sporadic cancers. Despite their potential pathogenic importance, genomic regions capable of regulating MLH1 expression over long distances have yet to be identified.Experimental Design: Here, we use chromosome conformation capture (3C) to screen a 650-kb region flanking the MLH1 locus to identify interactions between the MLH1 promoter and distal regions in MLH1-expressing and nonexpressing cells. Putative enhancers were functionally validated using luciferase reporter assays, chromatin immunoprecipitation, and CRISPR-Cas9-mediated deletion of endogenous regions. To evaluate whether germline variants in the enhancer might contribute to impaired MLH1 expression in patients with suspected Lynch syndrome, we also screened germline DNA from a cohort of 74 patients with no known coding mutations or epimutations at the MLH1 promoter.Results: A 1.8-kb DNA fragment, 35 kb upstream of the MLH1 transcription start site enhances MLH1 gene expression in colorectal cells. The enhancer was bound by CTCF and CRISPR-Cas9-mediated deletion of a core binding region impairs endogenous MLH1 expression. A total of 5.4% of suspected Lynch syndrome patients have a rare single-nucleotide variant (G > A; rs143969848; 2.5% in gnomAD European, non-Finnish) within a highly conserved CTCF-binding motif, which disrupts enhancer activity in SW620 colorectal carcinoma cells.Conclusions: A CTCF-bound region within the MLH1-35 enhancer regulates MLH1 expression in colorectal cells and is worthy of scrutiny in future genetic screening strategies for suspected Lynch syndrome associated with loss of MLH1 expression. Clin Cancer Res; 24(18); 4602-11. ©2018 AACR.

A Systematic Review on the Existing Screening Pathways for Lynch Syndrome Identification

Background

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common hereditary colon cancer syndrome, accounting for 3–5% of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases, and it is associated with the development of other cancers. Early detection of individuals with LS is relevant, since they can take advantage of life-saving intensive care surveillance. The debate regarding the best screening policy, however, is far from being concluded. This prompted us to conduct a systematic review of the existing screening pathways for LS.

Methods

We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, and SCOPUS online databases for the existing screening pathways for LS. The eligibility criteria for inclusion in this review required that the studies evaluated a structured and permanent screening pathway for the identification of LS carriers. The effectiveness of the pathways was analyzed in terms of LS detection rate.

Results

We identified five eligible studies. All the LS screening pathways started from CRC cases, of which three followed a universal screening approach. Concerning the laboratory procedures, the pathways used immunohistochemistry and/or microsatellite instability testing. If the responses of the tests indicated a risk for LS, the genetic counseling, performed by a geneticist or a genetic counselor, was mandatory to undergo DNA genetic testing. The overall LS detection rate ranged from 0 to 5.2%.

Conclusion

This systematic review reported different existing pathways for the identification of LS patients. Although current clinical guidelines suggest to test all the CRC cases to identify LS cases, the actual implementation of pathways for LS identification has not been realized. Large-scale screening programs for LS have the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality for CRC, but coordinated efforts in educating all key stakeholders and addressing public needs are still required.

Screening for Lynch syndrome in young Saudi colorectal cancer patients using microsatellite instability testing and next generation sequencing

Individuals with Lynch syndrome (LS) have germline variants in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes that confer a greatly increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), often at a young age. Identification of these individuals has been shown to increase their survival through improved surveillance. We previously identified 33 high risk cases for LS in the Saudi population by screening for microsatellite instability (MSI) in the tumor DNA of 284 young CRC patients. The aim of the present study was to identify MMR gene variants in this cohort of patients. Peripheral blood DNA was obtained from 13 individuals who were at high risk of LS due to positive MSI status and young age (<60 years at diagnosis). Next generation sequencing, Sanger sequencing and Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification were used to screen for germline variants in the MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2 MMR genes. These were cross-referenced against several variant databases, including the International Society for Gastrointestinal Hereditary Tumors Incorporated database. Variants with pathogenic or likely pathogenic significance were identified in 8 of the 13 high risk cases (62%), comprising 4 in MLH1 and 4 in MSH2. All carriers had a positive family history for CRC or endometrial cancer. Next generation sequencing is an effective strategy for identifying young CRC patients who are at high risk of LS because of positive MSI status. We estimate that 7% of CRC patients aged <60 years in Saudi Arabia are due to LS, potentially involving around 50 new cases per year.

When is Genomic Testing Cost-Effective? Testing for Lynch Syndrome in Patients with Newly-Diagnosed Colorectal Cancer and Their Relatives

Varying estimates of the cost-effectiveness of genomic testing applications can reflect differences in study questions, settings, methods and assumptions. This review compares recently published cost-effectiveness analyses of testing strategies for Lynch Syndrome (LS) in tumors from patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) for either all adult patients or patients up to age 70 along with cascade testing of relatives of probands. Seven studies published from 2010 through 2015 were identified and summarized. Five studies analyzed the universal offer of testing to adult patients with CRC and two others analyzed testing patients up to age 70; all except one reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) < $ 100,000 per life-year or quality-adjusted life-year gained. Three studies found lower ICERs for selective testing strategies using family history-based predictive models compared with universal testing. However, those calculations were based on estimates of sensitivity of predictive models derived from research studies, and it is unclear how sensitive such models are in routine clinical practice. Key model parameters that are influential in ICER estimates included 1) the number of first-degree relatives tested per proband identified with LS and 2) the cost of gene sequencing. Others include the frequency of intensive colonoscopic surveillance, the cost of colonoscopy, and the inclusion of extracolonic surveillance and prevention options.

Deficient mismatch repair: Read all about it (Review)

Defects in the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) proteins, result in a phenotype called microsatellite instability (MSI), occurring in up to 15% of sporadic colorectal cancers. Approximately one quarter of colon cancers with deficient MMR (dMMR) develop as a result of an inherited predisposition syndrome, Lynch syndrome (formerly known as HNPCC). It is essential to identify patients who potentially have Lynch syndrome, as not only they, but also family members, may require screening and monitoring. Diagnostic criteria have been developed, based primarily on Western populations, and several methodologies are available to identify dMMR tumours, including immunohistochemistry and microsatellite testing. These criteria have provided evidence supporting the introduction of reflex testing. Yet, it is becoming increasingly clear that tests have a limited sensitivity and specificity and may yet be superseded by next generation sequencing. In this review, the limitations of diagnostic criteria are discussed, and current and emerging screening technologies explained. There is now useful evidence supporting the prognostic and predictive value of dMMR status in colorectal tumours, but much less is known about their value in extracolonic tumours, that may also feature in Lynch syndrome. This review assesses current literature relating to dMMR in endometrial, ovarian, gastric and melanoma cancers, which it would seem, may benefit from large-scale clinical trials in order to further close the gap in knowledge between colorectal and extracolonic tumours.

Clinicopathological Features and Type of Surgery for Lynch Syndrome: Changes during the Past Two Decades

Purpose

The Korean Hereditary Tumor Registry, the first and one of the largest registries of hereditary tumors in Korea, has registered about 500 families with hereditary cancer syndromes. This study evaluates the temporal changes in clinicopathologic features and surgical patterns of Lynch syndrome (LS) patients.

Materials and Methods

Data on 182 unrelated LS patients were collected retrospectively. The patients were divided into the period 1 group (registered in 1990-2004) and 2 (registered in 2005-2014). The clinical characteristics of the two groups were compared to identify changes over time.

Results

The period 1 group included 76 patients; the period 2 group, 106 patients. The mean ages at diagnosis were 45.1 years (range, 13 to 85 years) for group 1 and 49.7 years (range, 20 to 84 years) for group 2 (p=0.015). The TNM stage at diagnosis did not differ significantly—period 1 group: stage 0-I (n=18, 23.7%), II (n=37, 48.7%), III (n=19, 25.0%), and IV (n=2, 2.6%); period 2 group: stage 0-I (n=30, 28.3%), II (n=35, 33.0%), III (n=37, 34.9%), and IV (n=4, 3.8%). Extended resection was more frequently performed (55/76, 72.4%) in the period 1 group than period 2 (49/106, 46.2%) (p=0.001).

Conclusion

Colorectal cancer in patients with LS registered at the Korean Hereditary Tumor Registry is still diagnosed at an advanced stage, more than two decades after registry’s establishment. Segmental resection was more frequently performed in the past decade. A prompt nationwide effort to raise public awareness of hereditary colorectal cancer and to support hereditary cancer registries is required in Korea.