Associations between molecular characteristics of colorectal serrated polyps and subsequent advanced colorectal neoplasia

ERBB2 Mutations as Potential Predictors for Recurrence in Colorectal Serrated Polyps by Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing

Background

Follow-up guidelines for serrated polyps (SPs) are mainly based on factors such as histology and size with limited evidence. The underlying genomic mechanism of SPs in relation to recurrence risks is utterly unknown.

Methods

We applied targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) approach on two groups of SPs [polyp-relapsed SPs (PRSPs) vs. polyp-free SPs (PFSPs)] based on the surveillance outcomes to compare differences of DNA variants in 71 colorectal cancer-associated genes. A multicenter validation cohort was established longitudinally from 2016 to 2019 to confirm the relevant results.

Results

Among the 96 NGS samples, at least one mutant after filtration was detected in 90 samples (94%). Molecular profiling presented BRAF, KRAS, and APC as top 3 mutated genes. FBXW7, MSH2, and ERBB2 might be recurrence-relevant, while DMD, BRCA1, and BRCA2 might be negatively correlated with recurrence. Notably, ERBB2 mutants (R678Q and V842I) (n = 5) had higher risks of polyp recurrence than the wild types (n = 85), with a median polyp-free interval of 15 months compared to 26 months [P < 0.001; hazard ratio (HR) = 4.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.9–12.8]. Furthermore, a multicenter cohort composed by 321 SPs verified that ERBB2-mutated SPs had increased risks of polyp recurrence (P < 0.001; HR = 3.7; 95% CI = 2.3–6.0) and advanced neoplastic lesion (ANL) recurrence (P < 0.001; HR = 10.0; 95% CI = 2.7–36.9) compared with wild-type SPs, respectively.

Conclusions

Our results are emphasizing that SP individuals with ERBB2 mutants are at higher risks of subsequent colorectal neoplasms. ERBB2 mutants might work as facilitated markers for prediction of high-risk SPs and might implicate a potential mechanism in the serrated pathway to colorectal carcinoma (CRC).

Post-polypectomy colonoscopy surveillance: Can we improve the diagnostic yield?

Although adenomas and serrated polyps are the preneoplastic lesions of colorectal cancer, only few of them will eventually progress to cancer. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the present and future of post-polypectomy colonoscopy surveillance. Post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines have recently been updated and all share the aim towards more selective and less frequent surveillance. We have examined these current guidelines and compared the recommendations of each of them. To improve the diagnostic yield of post-polypectomy surveillance it is important to find predictors of metachronous polyps that better identify high-risk individuals of developing advanced neoplasia. For this reason, we have also conducted a literature review of the molecular biomarkers of metachronous advanced colorectal polyps. Finally, we have discussed future directions of post-polypectomy surveillance and identified possible strategies to improve the use of endoscopic resources with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Effects of Somatic Methylation in Colonic Polyps on Risk of Developing Metachronous Advanced Colorectal Lesions

The utility of molecular markers for predicting the risk of metachronous advanced colorectal lesions (MACLs) remains poorly investigated. We examined the relationship between somatic hypermethylation in polyps at baseline and the risk of developing MACL. This retrospective cohort study included 281 consecutive patients with colonic polyps who were enrolled between 2007 and 2009 and followed-up until 2014. MACLs were defined as adenomas of ≥10 mm, high-grade dysplasia, or with a villous component; and serrated lesions of ≥10 mm or with dysplasia. In total, 595 polyps were removed at baseline colonoscopy and analyzed for pathological characteristics and CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) using the MS-MLPA (Methylation-Specific -- Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification) technique. Forty-five patients (16.0%) showed at least one CIMP+ polyp. MACL risk was higher in patients with CIMP+ polyps (odds ratio (OR), 4.50; 95% CI, 1.78-11.4; p = 0.002). Patients with CIMP+ polyps also exhibited shorter time to MACL development (33.8 months vs. 50.1 months; p < 0.001), even with adjustment for polyp size and number (OR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.33-4.34). Adding CIMP analysis improved the sensitivity (57.0% to 70.9%), negative predictive value (71.1% to 77.3%), and overall accuracy (49.8% to 52.0%) for MACL risk estimation. These results highlight that CIMP may be a useful marker for endoscopic surveillance.