The mystery of mismatch repair deficiency: lynch or lynch-like?

Unexplained mismatch repair deficiency: Case closed

To identify Lynch syndrome (LS) carriers, DNA mismatch repair (MMR) immunohistochemistry (IHC) is performed on colorectal cancers (CRCs). Upon subsequent LS diagnostics, MMR deficiency (MMRd) sometimes remains unexplained (UMMRd). Recently, the importance of complete LS diagnostics to explain UMMRd, involving MMR methylation, germline, and somatic analyses, was stressed. To explore why some MMRd CRCs remain unsolved, we performed a systematic review of the literature and mapped patients with UMMRd diagnosed in our center. A systematic literature search was performed in Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar for articles on UMMRd CRCs after complete LS diagnostics published until December 15, 2021. Additionally, UMMRd CRCs diagnosed in our center since 1993 were mapped. Of 754 identified articles, 17 were included, covering 74 patients with UMMRd. Five CRCs were microsatellite stable. Upon complete diagnostics, 39 patients had single somatic MMR hits, and six an MMR germline variant of unknown significance (VUS). Ten had somatic pathogenic variants (PVs) in POLD1, MLH3, MSH3, and APC. The remaining 14 patients were the only identifiable cases in the literature without a plausible identified cause of the UMMRd. Of those, nine were suspected to have LS. In our center, complete LS diagnostics in approximately 5,000 CRCs left seven MMRd CRCs unexplained. All had a somatic MMR hit or MMR germline VUS, indicative of a missed second MMR hit. In vitually all patients with UMMRd, complete LS diagnostics suggest MMR gene involvement. Optimizing detection of currently undetectable PVs and VUS interpretation might explain all UMMRd CRCs, considering UMMRd a case closed.

Canonical and uncanonical pathogenic germline variants in colorectal cancer patients by next-generation sequencing in a European referral center

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing use of next-generation sequencing (NGS), data concerning the gain in germline pathogenic variants (PVs) remain scanty, especially with respect to uncanonical ones. We aimed to verify the impact of different cancer predisposition genes (CPGs) on colorectal cancer (CRC) in patients referred for genetic evaluation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We enrolled for NGS, by Illumina TruSight Cancer panel comprising 94 CPGs, 190 consecutive subjects referred for microsatellite instability (MSI) CRC, polyposis, and/or family history.

RESULTS

Overall, 51 (26.8%) subjects carried 64 PVs; PVs coexisted in 4 (7.8%) carriers. PVs in mismatch repair (MMR) genes accounted for one-third of variant burden (31.3%). Four Lynch syndrome patients (20%) harbored additional PVs (HOXB13, CHEK2, BRCA1, NF1 plus BRIP1); such multiple PVs occurred only in subjects with PVs in mismatch syndrome genes (4/20 versus 0/31; P = 0.02). Five of 22 (22.7%) patients with MSI cancers but wild-type MMR genes harbored PVs in unconventional genes (FANCL, FANCA, ATM, PTCH1, BAP1). In 10/63 patients (15.9%) with microsatellite stable CRC, 6 had MUTYH PVs (2 being homozygous) and 4 exhibited uncanonical PVs (BRCA2, BRIP1, MC1R, ATM). In polyposis, we detected PVs in 13 (25.5%) cases: 5 (9.8%) in APC, 6 (11.8%) with biallelic PVs in MUTYH, and 2 (3.9%) in uncanonical genes (FANCM, XPC). In subjects tested for family history only, we detected two carriers (18.2%) with PVs (ATM, MUTYH).

CONCLUSION

Uncanonical variants may account for up to one-third of PVs, underlining the urgent need of consensus on clinical advice for incidental findings in cancer-predisposing genes not related to patient phenotype.

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.

Mismatch repair proteins immunohistochemical null phenotype in colon medullary carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

In mismatch repair (MMR) immunohistochemistry, four MMR proteins' staining pattern reveals which particular gene may be defective. However, in the null phenotype, four MMR proteins are lost; consequently, it will be challenging to assume the target gene by immunohistochemistry and to determine whether deficient MMR was sporadic or germline.

CASE REPORT

A 70-year-old man underwent right hemicolectomy with the diagnosis of ascending colon cancer. The postoperative histopathology revealed the diagnosis of medullary carcinoma and the loss of all four MMR expressions in immunohistochemistry. The mutation analysis using a peripheral blood sample showed no germline mutations in the four genes.

DISCUSSION

This clinical case presents an unusual colon carcinoma that showed a MMR protein immunohistochemistry null phenotype. The cause of expression loss of MMR proteins can be explained by the loss of MLH1 and MSH2 functions associated with somatic loss of function mutations, functional loss in all four MMR proteins associated with somatic loss of function mutations, or Lynch-like syndrome. Correct interpretation and accumulation of relevant cases are necessary to unveil unusual cases in the era of universal screening.

Prevalence and clinicopathological/molecular characteristics of mismatch repair protein-deficient tumours among surgically treated patients with prostate cancer in a Japanese hospital-based population

BACKGROUND

The prevalence and molecular characteristics of deficient mismatch repair prostate cancer in the Japanese population have scarcely been investigated.

METHODS

Immunohistochemistry for mismatch repair proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2) was performed in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded sections prepared from resected primary prostate cancers in patients who underwent prostatectomy at our institution between January 2001 and May 2016. Genetic and/or epigenetic alterations of mismatch repair genes were investigated in patients with any loss of mismatch repair protein expression in the tumour.

RESULTS

Of the 337 patients, four (1.2%) showed loss of mismatch repair protein expression on immunohistochemistry. All four patients showed loss of both MSH2 and MSH6 protein expression. Genetic testing was performed in two of the four patients, demonstrating no pathogenic germline alterations were present. In each of these two patients, at least one somatic alteration inactivating MSH2 without MSH2 hypermethylation was identified, leading to the diagnosis of supposed 'Lynch-like syndrome'. Patients with deficient mismatch repair prostate cancer were at a significantly higher stage (pT2pN0 vs. pT3-4pN0/pTanypN1, P = 0.02) and had a greater Gleason score (<8 vs. ≥8, P < 0.01) than those with proficient mismatch repair prostate cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of deficient mismatch repair prostate cancer in the Japanese hospital-based prostatectomized population was extremely low. To improve screening efficacy for deficient mismatch repair prostate cancer, screening candidates can be limited to patients with locally advanced, node-positive and/or Gleason score of 8 or greater prostate cancer. Universal tumour screening for Lynch syndrome seems ineffective in patients with prostate cancer.

Germline and Tumor Sequencing as a Diagnostic Tool To Resolve Suspected Lynch Syndrome

Patients in whom mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient cancer develops in the absence of pathogenic variants of germline MMR genes or somatic hypermethylation of the MLH1 gene promoter are classified as having suspected Lynch syndrome (SLS). Germline whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and targeted and genome-wide tumor sequencing were applied to identify the underlying cause of tumor MMR deficiency in SLS. Germline WGS was performed on samples from 14 cancer-affected patients with SLS, including two sets of first-degree relatives. MMR genes were assessed for germline pathogenic variants, including complex structural rearrangements and noncoding variants. Tumor tissue was assessed for somatic MMR gene mutations using targeted, whole-exome sequencing or WGS. Germline WGS identified pathogenic MMR variants in 3 of the 14 cases (21.4%), including a 9.5-megabase inversion disrupting MSH2 in a mother and daughter. Excluding these 3 MMR carriers, tumor sequencing identified at least two somatic MMR gene mutations in 8 of 11 tumors tested (72.7%). In a second mother-daughter pair, a somatic cause of tumor MMR deficiency was supported by the presence of double somatic MSH2 mutations in their respective tumors. More than 70% of SLS cases had double somatic MMR mutations in the absence of germline pathogenic variants in the MMR or other DNA repair-related genes on WGS, and, therefore, were confidently assigned a noninherited cause of tumor MMR deficiency.

Efficacy of paired tumor and germline testing in evaluation of patients with Lynch-like syndrome in a large integrated healthcare setting

Patients with mismatch repair (MMR) deficient colorectal cancer (CRC) without detectable germline pathogenic variants (PVs) or likely pathogenic variants (LPVs) in MMR genes are often labeled as Lynch-like syndrome (LLS). We sought to evaluate the efficacy of paired tumor and germline testing in risk stratification of patients with LLS in a large, community-based, integrated healthcare setting. Through the universal screening program for Lynch syndrome at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, we identified all patients with MMR deficient colorectal tumors without detectable germline PVs or LPVs between April 2011 and October 2018. These patients were categorized as LLS and were offered paired tumor and germline testing. Risk stratification and patient management were assessed upon completion of all testing. Of the 50 patients with LLS who underwent paired tumor and germline testing, 62% (n = 31) were categorized as sporadic, 6% (n = 3) had Lynch syndrome, and 32% (n = 16) remained inconclusive. Among the sporadic cases, 65% (n = 20) had a PV (n = 18) or LPV (n = 2) in combination with loss of heterozygosity while 35% (n = 11) had two somatic PVs/LPVs involving the same MMR gene. Our findings showed paired tumor and germline testing resolved the etiology in the majority of patients and is a valuable strategy in risk stratification and management of patients with LLS. Further studies are needed to assess the optimal application of paired testing in different practice settings, particularly with evolving technology and decreasing cost of molecular sequencing.

Prevalence and Molecular Characterization of Defective DNA Mismatch Repair in Small-bowel Carcinoma in a Japanese Hospital-based Population

Objectives

To investigate the prevalence and molecular characteristics of defective DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) in small-bowel carcinoma (SBC) in a Japanese-hospital population.

Methods

Immunohistochemistry was performed to evaluate the expression of MMR proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2) in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded sections prepared from surgically resected primary SBCs from 30 patients during March 2002 to March 2017. Genetic testing for Lynch syndrome was performed in patients who demonstrated MMR protein loss.

Results

Two of 30 patients (6.7%) demonstrated concomitant loss of MSH2/MSH6 protein expression. Further genetic testing identified a pathogenic MSH2 variant in one of these patients.

Conclusions

The prevalence of dMMR SBCs in a Japanese hospital-based population seems lower than that reported in previous studies. To determine whether dMMR SBCs might be strongly linked to Lynch syndrome, there is a need for further investigation with a larger sample size.

Molecular tumor testing in patients with Lynch-like syndrome reveals a de novo mosaic variant of a mismatch repair gene transmitted to offspring

In Lynch-like syndrome, patients have tumors with microsatellite instability but no germline pathogenic variant in mismatch repair genes or somatic methylation of the MLH1 promoter. Identification of the mechanism that causes these tumors is crucial for guiding screening of the patients and their relatives. Double somatic hits are the usual explanation for these cases; however, we have previously reported a de novo mosaic pathogenic variant in a patient with Lynch-like syndrome. Using tumoral NGS analysis of a series of 16 patients with Lynch-like syndrome, we found six patients with double somatic hits, including one patient with mosaicism of a de novo pathogenic variant in MSH2. This variant was transmitted to the patient's offspring, which has significant implications for genetic counseling.

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.

Lynch-like syndrome is as frequent as Lynch syndrome in early-onset nonfamilial nonpolyposis colorectal cancer

Early-onset (<50 years-old) nonpolyposis nonfamilial colorectal cancer (EO NP NF CRC) is a common clinical challenge. Although Lynch syndrome (LS) is associated with EO CRC, the frequency of this syndrome in the EO NF cases remains unknown. Besides, mismatch repair deficient (MMRd) CRCs with negative MMR gene testing have recently been described in up to 60% of cases and termed "Lynch-like syndrome" (LLS). Management and counseling decisions of these patients are complicated because of unconfirmed suspicions of hereditary cancer. To define the prevalence of MMR deficient CRCs, LS and LLS in patients with EO NP NF CRC, we recruited 102 patients with a first diagnosis of NP NF CRC ≤ 50 years old during 2003-2009 who underwent genetic counseling at our institution in Argentina. Tumor immunohistochemical (IHC) MMR for protein expression and microsatellite instability (MSI) status were evaluated, and in those with loss of MLH1 expression by IHC, somatic BRAF V600E mutation and both somatic and germline MLH1 methylation levels were studied. Tumors characterized as MMRd without somatic BRAF mutation nor MLH1 methylation were sent for germline analysis. Twenty one (20.6%) tumors were MMRd. Fourteen of 16 putative LS cases underwent germline testing: 6 pathogenic mutations were identified and 8 cases had no identifiable pathogenic mutations. The prevalence of LS and LLS in this cohort was 5.8% (6/102) and 7.8% (8/102), respectively. As a conclusion we found that 20% of patients with EO NP NF CRC have MMRd tumors, and at least half of these are likely to have LLS.

Family still matters: Counseling patients with complex family histories of colon and endometrial cancers

Background

There are no national guidelines for the management of patients with a family history consistent with Lynch syndrome (LS) but a negative genetic test. To determine current management practices, genetic counselors’ (GCs) recommendations were assessed.

Methods

A survey of GCs using five hypothetical pedigrees was posted to National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) discussion forums. Descriptive statistics were used.

Results

One‐hundred and fifteen surveys were completed. A pedigree with a first‐degree relative (FDR) with early‐onset colorectal cancer (CRC) and a family history of CRC and endometrial cancer (EC) prompted 83% (n = 95) of respondents to recommend early and frequent colonoscopies, based on family history. When the CRCs and ECs occurred in family members removed from the proband, 96% (n = 110) of GCs said they would screen based on family history. However, only 52% (n = 60) suggested CRC screening should begin earlier and occur more often, and 43% (n = 50) suggested CRC screening should follow standard age and frequency guidelines.

Conclusion

Concordance of opinion among GCs for the management of patients with negative genetic test results exists when FDRs are affected. However, when affected relatives are more distant, GCs disagreed on screening recommendations. These data suggest a need for guidelines for patients with a family history of cancer and a negative genetic test.

Clinical characteristics of patients with colorectal cancer with double somatic mismatch repair mutations compared with Lynch syndrome

BACKGROUND

Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) with mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) tumours without MLH1 methylation or germline MMR pathogenic variants (PV) were previously thought to have Lynch syndrome (LS). It is now appreciated that they can have double somatic (DS) MMR PVs. We explored the clinical characteristics between patients with DS tumours and LS in two population-based cohorts.

METHODS

We included patients with CRC from Ohio 2013-2016 and Iceland 2000-2009. All had microsatellite instability testing and/or immunohistochemistry (IHC) of MMR proteins, and MLH1 methylation testing when indicated. Germline next-generation sequencing was performed for all with dMMR tumours; tumour sequencing followed for patients with unexplained dMMR. Clinical characteristics of DS patients and patients with LS were compared.

RESULTS

Of the 232 and 51 patients with non-methylated dMMR tumours in the Ohio and Iceland cohorts, respectively, 57.8% (n=134) and 45.1% (n=23) had LS, 32.8% (n=76) and 31.4% (n=16) had DS PVs, 6% (n=14) and 9.8% (n=5) were unexplained and 4.3% (n=10) and 13.7% (n=7) had incorrect IHC. Age of diagnosis for DS patients was older than patients with LS (p=3.73×10-4) in the two cohorts. Patients with LS were more likely to meet Amsterdam II criteria (OR=15.81, p=8.47×10-6) and have multiple LS-associated tumours (OR=6.67, p=3.31×10-5). Absence of MLH1/PMS2 was predictive of DS PVs; isolated MSH6 and PMS2 absence was predictive of LS in both cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with LS are 15× more likely to meet Amsterdam II criteria and >5× more likely to have multiple cancers as compared with those with DS tumours. Furthermore, isolated loss of MSH6 or PMS2 protein predicts LS.

A potpourri of pathogenetic pathways in endometrial carcinoma with a focus on Lynch Syndrome

Endometrial carcinoma is the most frequently occurring female genital tract malignancy in developed nations, with a rising annual incidence. Endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (EEC), the most common histological variant, differs in morphologic and molecular characteristics from serous carcinomas but morphological distinction of high-grade EECs from serous carcinomas may prove difficult. Thus, molecular categorization of tumors may allow for better tumor classification with greater insight into the underlying biology of endometrial carcinomas with new therapeutic options. Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a commonly occurring molecular aberration in EECs and has been identified in most Lynch Syndrome (LS) associated tumors. This tumor syndrome predisposes afflicted individuals to a myriad of tumors including endometrial carcinoma. Herein, the molecular signature of endometrial tumors as well as LS, and its clinical manifestations are reviewed. Understanding of the pathogenetic pathways allows for greater comprehension of occurrences at a molecular level which are then appreciated at a cellular and tissue level, by the histopathologist. The molecular classification of endometrial tumors allows for further targeted therapeutic options for affected patients. Screening tests for patients with suspected LS enables surveillance of other tumors in the affected patient and her family with the potential to decrease morbidity and mortality. It is envisioned that this overview will allow for enhanced comprehension of genetic pathways by practicing pathologists, oncologists, gynecologists and other members of the multidisciplinary team, all of whom are involved in the management of the patient with an endometrial malignancy.

Cancer screening behaviors and risk perceptions among family members of colorectal cancer patients with unexplained mismatch repair deficiency

Communication gaps in families with unexplained mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency (UMMRD) could negatively impact the screening behaviors of relatives of individual with UMMRD. We evaluated cancer risk perception, screening behaviors, and family communication among relatives of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with UMMRD. Fifty-one family members of 17 probands with UMMRD completed a questionnaire about cancer risk perception, adherence to Lynch syndrome (LS) screening recommendations, and communication with relatives. Clinical data about the probands were obtained from medical records. Thirty-eight participants (78%) were worried from having cancer and twenty-one participants (42%) had undergone colonoscopy in the past 2 years, as recommended for LS families. In terms of screening for extracolonic cancers, only two eligible participants (3.9%) were screened for gastric, endometrial (10.0%), and ovarian (9.5%) cancers. Additionally, 5 participants (10%) underwent genetic counseling. Most participants were not told by anyone to be screened for extracolonic cancers (84, 85, and 95% for gastric, ovarian, and endometrial cancers, respectively). A minority of family members of CRC patients with UMMRD follow cancer screening as recommended for LS families. Health care providers should encourage patients with UMMRD to share information on LS-related cancers screening, especially extracolonic cancers, with their relatives.

Novel Implications in Molecular Diagnosis of Lynch Syndrome

About 10% of total colorectal cancers are associated with known Mendelian inheritance, as Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (FAP) and Lynch syndrome (LS). In these cancer types the clinical manifestations of disease are due to mutations in high-risk alleles, with a penetrance at least of 70%. The LS is associated with germline mutations in the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes. However, the mutation detection analysis of these genes does not always provide informative results for genetic counseling of LS patients. Very often, the molecular analysis reveals the presence of variants of unknown significance (VUSs) whose interpretation is not easy and requires the combination of different analytical strategies to get a proper assessment of their pathogenicity. In some cases, these VUSs may make a more substantial overall contribution to cancer risk than the well-assessed severe Mendelian variants. Moreover, it could also be possible that the simultaneous presence of these genetic variants in several MMR genes that behave as low risk alleles might contribute in a cooperative manner to increase the risk of hereditary cancer. In this paper, through a review of the recent literature, we have speculated a novel inheritance model in the Lynch syndrome; this could pave the way toward new diagnostic perspectives.

Clinicopathological differences between familial colorectal cancer type X and sporadic cancer in an isolated area of spain

AIM

Very few studies have compared the epidemiological characteristics of patients with familial colorectal cancer Type X (FCCTX) with those of sporadic colorectal cancer (S-CRC). The aim of this study was to compare clinicopathological characteristics and survival between FCCTX and S-CRC in patients from a historically isolated geographical region.

METHOD

A retrospective study was carried out of patients with S-CRC and FCCTX treated in the Canary Islands. Family and personal history of colorectal cancer (CRC) were recorded, together with genetic (microsatellite instability), immunohistochemical and clinical variables.

RESULTS

Forty-eight (10.6%) of 451 patients were classified as FCCTX and the remaining 403 (89.4%) as S-CRC. Age at the diagnosis of tumour was significantly lower in FCCTX than in S-CRC (64.06 ± 12.65 years vs 69.13 ± 10.80 years; P = 0.01; Z = -2.48). Patients with FCCTX had a larger number of synchronous tumours (P = 0.09). Recurrence was significantly higher in FCCTX than in S-CRC (18.7% vs 8.6%; P = 0.01). Survival correlated significantly with the number of first-degree and second-degree relatives with CRC (P = 0.04; OR: 1.368, 95% CI: 1.01-1.84, and P = 0.04; OR: 1.363, 95% CI: 1.08-1.65) and with the total number of cases of CRC in the immediate family (P < 0.01; OR: 1.377, 95% CI: 1.17-1.61). Recurrence-free time was significantly lower in patients with FCCTX (log-rank = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Significant differences were found in several demographic and clinicopathological variables between patients with FCCTX and patients with S-CRC. These included increased tumour presentation under the age of 50 years and a higher recurrence rate in patients with FCCTX, suggesting an increased risk of CRC in this group.

Laboratory Assays in Evaluation of Lynch Syndrome in Patients with Endometrial Carcinoma

This article reviews the main tissue testing modalities for Lynch Syndrome in the pathology laboratory, such as immunohistochemistry and PCR based analyses, and discusses their routine application, interpretation pitfalls, and troubleshooting of common technical performance issues. Discrepancies between laboratory and genetic testing may arise, and are examined in the context of the complexity of molecular abnormalities associated with Lynch Syndrome. The merits of targeted versus universal screening in a changing healthcare climate are addressed. In the absence of comprehensive screening programs, specific tumor topography and histological features that may prompt pathologist-initiated molecular tumor testing are outlined.

Approaches to diagnose DNA mismatch repair gene defects in cancer

The DNA repair pathway mismatch repair (MMR) is responsible for the recognition and correction of DNA biosynthetic errors caused by inaccurate nucleotide incorporation during replication. Faulty MMR leads to failure to address the mispairs or insertion deletion loops (IDLs) left behind by the replicative polymerases and results in increased mutation load at the genome. The realization that defective MMR leads to a hypermutation phenotype and increased risk of tumorigenesis highlights the relevance of this pathway for human disease. The association of MMR defects with increased risk of cancer development was first observed in colorectal cancer patients that carried inactivating germline mutations in MMR genes and the disease was named as hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC). Currently, a growing list of cancers is found to be MMR defective and HNPCC has been renamed Lynch syndrome (LS) partly to include the associated risk of developing extra-colonic cancers. In addition, a number of non-hereditary, mostly epigenetic, alterations of MMR genes have been described in sporadic tumors. Besides conferring a strong cancer predisposition, genetic or epigenetic inactivation of MMR genes also renders cells resistant to some chemotherapeutic agents. Therefore, diagnosis of MMR deficiency has important implications for the management of the patients, the surveillance of their relatives in the case of LS and for the choice of treatment. Some of the alterations found in MMR genes have already been well defined and their pathogenicity assessed. Despite this substantial wealth of knowledge, the effects of a large number of alterations remain uncharacterized (variants of uncertain significance, VUSs). The advent of personalized genomics is likely to increase the list of VUSs found in MMR genes and anticipates the need of diagnostic tools for rapid assessment of their pathogenicity. This review describes current tools and future strategies for addressing the relevance of MMR gene alterations in human disease.

Screening adherence and cancer risk perceptions in colorectal cancer survivors with Lynch-like syndrome

Cancer screening recommendations for patients with Lynch-like syndrome (LLS) are not well defined. We evaluated adherence to Lynch syndrome (LS) screening recommendations, cancer risk perceptions, and communication within the families among colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors with LLS. Thirty-four participants with LLS completed a questionnaire about risk perception, adherence to LS screening recommendations, and communication with relatives. Clinical data were obtained from medical records. Most participants (76%) believed they should undergo colonoscopy every 1-2 years. Only 41% correctly interpreted their genetic tests as uninformative negative or as variant of unknown significance for LS. Less than half had had an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for screening purpose. Among female participants, 86% had been screened for endometrial cancer (EC) and 71% for ovarian cancer. Most participants had informed relatives about the CRC diagnosis and advised them to undergo CRC screening, but only 50% advised female relatives to be screened for EC and only one-third advised relatives to have genetic counseling. Most CRC survivors with LLS follow the same cancer screening recommended for LS patients but do not understand the meaning of LLS. Greater care must be devoted to communicating the implications of nondiagnostic germline mutation testing among patients with LLS.

Genetics, biomarkers, hereditary cancer syndrome diagnosis, heterogeneity and treatment: a review

OPINION STATEMENT

Molecular genetic pathways that drive the phenotypic and genotypic heterogeneity of hereditary colorectal cancer also can affect response to chemotherapy and chemoprevention. These mutations also can alter patients' response to therapy. Environmental differences can affect this highly complex conundrum. We will use Lynch syndrome as a model to explore this issue. However, to begin with, after more than a century of documentation, we must ask what is meant by the eponym "Lynch syndrome". Germline mutations may act as drivers of chemoprevention and chemotherapy and therein may act positively or conversely they may have a negative effect in terms of inhibiting the inactivation of cancer-causing germline mutations. A relatively new field of hereditary cancer therapeutics has significantly impacted cancer care, from the standpoint of the sensitivity or resistance to a particular form of chemotherapy and/or chemoprevention. The question for the diagnostician and therapist must always concern what is the best possible management approach for the patient, particularly when he or she harbors a cancer-causing germline mutation, which, in this case, causes Lynch syndrome. Continued molecular genetic research might yield a more tailored effective treatment for Lynch syndrome. The ultimate goal of such hereditary oncologic research is to better understand the mutation's therapeutic task, namely, its potential to benefit the patient in terms of its treatment goal, thereby fulfilling the essence of personalized medicine. However, this goal may be exceedingly complicated. For example, in the natural clinical and molecular genetic history of hereditary forms of cancer, there will be a predominance of early-onset cancers of multiple anatomic sites. In our Lynch syndrome model, these will be most commonly colorectal, endometrial, and ovarian cancer. Attention must initially be focused upon cancer's early age of onset coupled with the tendency to multiple primary cancers so that, in the case of CRC, colonoscopic screening must be initiated by age 20-25 years and repeated every other year until age 40 years and then annually thereafter. However, screening will be of limited efficacy in the gynecologic cancers (endometrial and ovarian) so that once the family is completed, particularly by age 35-40 years, careful attention must be given to the option of prophylactic hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Given issues of tumor heterogeneity, selected Lynch syndrome families may show an excess of urologic cancers or cancers of the small bowel, and highly targeted screening should be given serious consideration for these as well as cancers of other anatomic sites in such high-risk, cancer-prone patients.

Mismatch repair-deficient crypt foci in Lynch syndrome--molecular alterations and association with clinical parameters

Lynch syndrome is caused by germline mutations of DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes, most frequently MLH1 and MSH2. Recently, MMR-deficient crypt foci (MMR-DCF) have been identified as a novel lesion which occurs at high frequency in the intestinal mucosa from Lynch syndrome mutation carriers, but very rarely progress to cancer. To shed light on molecular alterations and clinical associations of MMR-DCF, we systematically searched the intestinal mucosa from Lynch syndrome patients for MMR-DCF by immunohistochemistry. The identified lesions were characterised for alterations in microsatellite-bearing genes with proven or suspected role in malignant transformation. We demonstrate that the prevalence of MMR-DCF (mean 0.84 MMR-DCF per 1 cm² mucosa in the colorectum of Lynch syndrome patients) was significantly associated with patients’ age, but not with patients’ gender. No MMR-DCF were detectable in the mucosa of patients with sporadic MSI-H colorectal cancer (n = 12). Microsatellite instability of at least one tested marker was detected in 89% of the MMR-DCF examined, indicating an immediate onset of microsatellite instability after MMR gene inactivation. Coding microsatellite mutations were most frequent in the genes HT001 (ASTE1) with 33%, followed by AIM2 (17%) and BAX (10%). Though MMR deficiency alone appears to be insufficient for malignant transformation, it leads to measurable microsatellite instability even in single MMR-deficient crypts. Our data indicate for the first time that the frequency of MMR-DCF increases with patients’ age. Similar patterns of coding microsatellite instability in MMR-DCF and MMR-deficient cancers suggest that certain combinations of coding microsatellite mutations, including mutations of the HT001, AIM2 and BAX gene, may contribute to the progression of MMR-deficient lesions into MMR-deficient cancers.

Evolving approach and clinical significance of detecting DNA mismatch repair deficiency in colorectal carcinoma

The last two decades have seen significant advancement in our understanding of colorectal tumors with DNA mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency. The ever-emerging revelations of new molecular and genetic alterations in various clinical conditions have necessitated constant refinement of disease terminology and classification. Thus, a case with the clinical condition of hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer as defined by the Amsterdam criteria may be one of Lynch syndrome characterized by a germline defect in one of the several MMR genes, one of the yet-to-be-defined "Lynch-like syndrome" if there is evidence of MMR deficiency in the tumor but no detectable germline MMR defect or tumor MLH1 promoter methylation, or "familial colorectal cancer type X" if there is no evidence of MMR deficiency. The detection of these conditions carries significant clinical implications. The detection tools and strategies are constantly evolving. The Bethesda guidelines symbolize a selective approach that uses clinical information and tumor histology as the basis to select high-risk individuals. Such a selective approach has subsequently been found to have limited sensitivity, and is thus gradually giving way to the alternative universal approach that tests all newly diagnosed colorectal cancers. Notably, the universal approach also has its own limitations; its cost-effectiveness in real practice, in particular, remains to be determined. Meanwhile, technological advances such as the next-generation sequencing are offering the promise of direct genetic testing for MMR deficiency at an affordable cost probably in the near future. This article reviews the up-to-date molecular definitions of the various conditions related to MMR deficiency, and discusses the tools and strategies that have been used in detecting these conditions. Special emphasis will be placed on the evolving nature and the clinical importance of the disease definitions and the detection strategies.

Colon and endometrial cancers with mismatch repair deficiency can arise from somatic, rather than germline, mutations

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with Lynch syndrome carry germline mutations in single alleles of genes encoding the mismatch repair (MMR) proteins MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2; when the second allele becomes mutated, cancer can develop. Increased screening for Lynch syndrome has identified patients with tumors that have deficiency in MMR, but no germline mutations in genes encoding MMR proteins. We investigated whether tumors with deficient MMR had acquired somatic mutations in patients without germline mutations in MMR genes using next-generation sequencing.

METHODS

We analyzed blood and tumor samples from 32 patients with colorectal or endometrial cancer who participated in Lynch syndrome screening studies in Ohio and were found to have tumors with MMR deficiency (based on microsatellite instability and/or absence of MMR proteins in immunohistochemical analysis, without hypermethylation of MLH1), but no germline mutations in MMR genes. Tumor DNA was sequenced for MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2, EPCAM, POLE, and POLD1 with ColoSeq and mutation frequencies were established.

RESULTS

Twenty-two of 32 patients (69%) were found to have 2 somatic (tumor) mutations in MMR genes encoding proteins that were lost from tumor samples, based on immunohistochemistry. Of the 10 remaining tumors 3 had one somatic mutation in a MMR gene, with possible loss of heterozygosity that could lead to MMR deficiency, 6 were found to be false-positive results (19%), and 1 had only one mutation in a MMR gene and remained unexplained. All of the tumors found to have somatic MMR mutations were of the hypermutated phenotype (>12 mutations/megabase); 6 had mutation frequencies >200/megabase, and 5 of these had somatic mutations in POLE, which encodes a DNA polymerase.

CONCLUSIONS

Some patients are found to have tumors with MMR defects during screening for Lynch syndrome, yet have no identifiable germline mutations in MMR genes. We found that almost 70% of these patients acquire somatic mutations in MMR genes, leading to a hypermutated phenotype of tumor cells. Patients with colon or endometrial cancers with MMR deficiency not explained by germline mutations might undergo analysis for tumor mutations in MMR genes to guide future surveillance guidelines.

Comparison of clinical features between suspected familial colorectal cancer type X and Lynch syndrome in Japanese patients with colorectal cancer: a cross-sectional study conducted by the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum

OBJECTIVE

The characteristics of familial colorectal cancer type X are poorly defined. Here we aimed to clarify the differences in clinical features between suspected familial colorectal cancer type X and Lynch syndrome in Japanese patients.

METHODS

We performed germline mutation analyses of mismatch repair genes in 125 patients. Patients who met the Amsterdam Criteria I but lacked mismatch repair gene mutations were diagnosed with suspected familial colorectal cancer type X.

RESULTS

We identified 69 patients with Lynch syndrome and 25 with suspected familial colorectal cancer type X. The frequencies of gastric and extracolonic Lynch syndrome-associated cancers were lower with suspected familial colorectal cancer type X than with Lynch syndrome. The number of organs with Lynch syndrome-associated cancer was significantly lower with suspected familial colorectal cancer type X than with Lynch syndrome. The cumulative incidence of extracolonic Lynch syndrome-associated cancer was significantly lower with suspected familial colorectal cancer type X than with Lynch syndrome. We estimated that the median cancer risk in 60-year-old patients with Lynch syndrome was 89, 36 and 24% for colorectal, endometrial and gastric cancers, respectively. Analyses of family members, including probands, revealed that the median age at diagnosis of extracolonic Lynch syndrome-associated cancer was significantly older with suspected familial colorectal cancer type X than with Lynch syndrome. The frequency of extracolonic Lynch syndrome-associated cancer was significantly lower with suspected familial colorectal cancer type X than with Lynch syndrome.

CONCLUSION

A significant difference in extracolonic Lynch syndrome-associated cancer was evident between suspected familial colorectal cancer type X and Lynch syndrome.

Hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes

SUMMARY Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies and the second-leading cause of cancer death in both sexes in developed countries. Over the last 25 years, highly penetrant monogenic germline mutations that predispose to CRC and other digestive tumors have been identified, accounting for up to 5% of all CRC cases. Identification and characterization of these disorders have allowed modification of their natural history, with a substantial decrease in morbidity and mortality among high-risk patients. Recognizing hereditary CRC has also impacted predictive genetic testing and personalized medicine based on genomic information. This review summarizes the current knowledge on hereditary CRC regarding pathogenesis, clinical features, diagnostic evaluation and management recommendations.

Tumor mismatch repair immunohistochemistry and DNA MLH1 methylation testing of patients with endometrial cancer diagnosed at age younger than 60 years optimizes triage for population-level germline mismatch repair gene mutation testing

PURPOSE

Clinicopathologic data from a population-based endometrial cancer cohort, unselected for age or family history, were analyzed to determine the optimal scheme for identification of patients with germline mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Endometrial cancers from 702 patients recruited into the Australian National Endometrial Cancer Study (ANECS) were tested for MMR protein expression using immunohistochemistry (IHC) and for MLH1 gene promoter methylation in MLH1-deficient cases. MMR mutation testing was performed on germline DNA of patients with MMR-protein deficient tumors. Prediction of germline mutation status was compared for combinations of tumor characteristics, age at diagnosis, and various clinical criteria (Amsterdam, Bethesda, Society of Gynecologic Oncology, ANECS).

RESULTS

Tumor MMR-protein deficiency was detected in 170 (24%) of 702 cases. Germline testing of 158 MMR-deficient cases identified 22 truncating mutations (3% of all cases) and four unclassified variants. Tumor MLH1 methylation was detected in 99 (89%) of 111 cases demonstrating MLH1/PMS2 IHC loss; all were germline MLH1 mutation negative. A combination of MMR IHC plus MLH1 methylation testing in women younger than 60 years of age at diagnosis provided the highest positive predictive value for the identification of mutation carriers at 46% versus ≤ 41% for any other criteria considered.

CONCLUSION

Population-level identification of patients with MMR mutation-positive endometrial cancer is optimized by stepwise testing for tumor MMR IHC loss in patients younger than 60 years, tumor MLH1 methylation in individuals with MLH1 IHC loss, and germline mutations in patients exhibiting loss of MSH6, MSH2, or PMS2 or loss of MLH1/PMS2 with absence of MLH1 methylation.

Outcomes of screening endometrial cancer patients for Lynch syndrome by patient-administered checklist

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to implement a patient-administered checklist designed to identify endometrial cancer patients at elevated risk for Lynch syndrome; measure subsequent genetic counseling and testing; and identify differences between those who attended genetic counseling and those who did not.

METHODS

We developed a 4-item yes/no checklist of personal and family history risk factors for Lynch syndrome-associated endometrial cancer and recommended referral for genetic counseling for patients meeting any of the criteria. Retrospective chart review was performed to determine subsequent genetic counseling and testing outcomes over a 15 month period.

RESULTS

6/387 (1.6%) of endometrial cancer patients tested positive for a Lynch syndrome mutation. 4/24 (17%) of endometrial cancer patients who met referral criteria and attended genetic counseling tested positive. 38/70 (55%) of patients who met referral criteria were not seen for genetic counseling. Patients who were diagnosed with endometrial cancer at younger ages, who had primary surgery at our institution, or who met more than one referral criteria were more likely to be seen for genetic counseling.

CONCLUSIONS

Endometrial cancer patients who met referral criteria and attended genetic counseling comprised a population enriched for Lynch syndrome. This approach allowed Lynch syndrome evaluation resources to be targeted to a population of patients that is high risk and interested in the information. The referral rate of at-risk patients needs to be improved, and allocating resources towards this goal could increase the identification of Lynch syndrome while avoiding some of the pitfalls of universal screening.