In a number of families with colorectal adenomatous polyposis or suspected Lynch syndrome/HNPCC, no germline alteration in the APC, MUTYH, or mismatch repair (MMR) genes are found. Missense mutations in the polymerase genes POLE and POLD1 have recently been identified as rare cause of multiple colorectal adenomas and carcinomas, a condition termed polymerase proofreading‐associated polyposis (PPAP). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical relevance and phenotypic spectrum of polymerase germline mutations. Therefore, targeted sequencing of the polymerase genes POLD1, POLD2, POLD3, POLD4, POLE, POLE2, POLE3 and POLE4 was performed in 266 unrelated patients with polyposis or fulfilled Amsterdam criteria. The POLE mutation c.1270C>G;p.Leu424Val was detected in four unrelated patients. The mutation was present in 1.5% (4/266) of all patients, 4% (3/77) of all familial cases and 7% (2/30) of familial polyposis cases. The colorectal phenotype in 14 affected individuals ranged from typical adenomatous polyposis to a HNPCC phenotype, with high intrafamilial variability. Multiple colorectal carcinomas and duodenal adenomas were common, and one case of duodenal carcinoma was reported. Additionally, various extraintestinal lesions were evident. Nine further putative pathogenic variants were identified. The most promising was c.1306C>T;p.Pro436Ser in POLE. In conclusion, a PPAP was identified in a substantial number of polyposis and familial colorectal cancer patients. Screening for polymerase proofreading mutations should therefore be considered, particularly in unexplained familial cases. The present study broadens the phenotypic spectrum of PPAP to duodenal adenomas and carcinomas, and identified novel, potentially pathogenic variants in four polymerase genes.

To uncover pathogenic deep intronic variants in patients with colorectal adenomatous polyposis, in whom no germline mutation in the APC or MUTYH genes can be identified by routine diagnostics, we performed a systematic APC messenger RNA analysis in 125 unrelated mutation‐negative cases. Overall, we identified aberrant transcripts in 8% of the patients (familial cases 30%; early‐onset manifestation 21%). In eight of them, two different out‐of‐frame pseudoexons were found consisting of a 167‐bp insertion from intron 4 in five families with a shared founder haplotype and a 83‐bp insertion from intron 10 in three patients. The pseudoexon formation was caused by three different heterozygous germline mutations, which are supposed to activate cryptic splice sites. In conclusion, a few deep intronic mutations contribute substantially to the APC mutation spectrum. Complementary DNA analysis and/or target sequencing of intronic regions should be considered as an additional mutation discovery approach in polyposis patients. Hum Mutat 33:1045–1050, 2012.

Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) is an inherited cancer susceptibility syndrome characterized by an elevated risk for diffuse gastric cancer (DGC) and lobular breast cancer (LBC). Some patients fulfilling the clinical testing criteria harbor a pathogenic CDH1 or CTNNA1 germline variant. However, the underlying mechanism for around 80% of the patients with a family or personal history of DGC and LBC has so far not been elucidated. In this cohort study, patients meeting the 2015 HDGC clinical testing criteria were included, and subsequently, CDH1 sequencing was performed. Of the 207 patients (161 families) in this study, we detected 21 pathogenic or likely pathogenic CDH1 variants (PV) in 60 patients (28 families) and one CTNNA1 PV in two patients from one family. Sixty-eight percent (n = 141) of patients were female. The overall PV detection rate was 18% (29/161 families). Criterion 1 and 3 of the 2015 HDGC testing criteria yielded the highest detection rate of CDH1/CTNNA1 PVs (21% and 28%). PV carriers and patients without proven PV were compared. Risk of gastric cancer (GC) (38/62 61% vs. 102/140 73%) and age at diagnosis (40 ± 13 years vs. 44 ± 12 years) were similar between the two groups. However, GC was more advanced in gastrectomy specimens of patients without PV (81% vs. 26%). LBC prevalence in female carriers of a PV was 20% (n = 8/40). Clinical phenotypes differed strongly between families with the same PV. Emphasis should be on detecting more causative genes predisposing for HDGC and improve the management of patients without a proven pathogenic germline variant.

In a considerable number of patients with a suspected hereditary tumor syndrome (HTS), no underlying germline mutation is detected in the most likely affected genes. The present study aimed to establish and validate a large gene panel for HTS, and determine its diagnostic yield and clinical utility. The study cohort comprised 173 patients with suspected, but unexplained, HTS (group U) and 64 HTS patients with a broad spectrum of known germline mutations (group K). All patients in group U presented with early age at onset, multiple tumors, and/or a familial clustering of various tumor types; no germline mutation had been identified during routine diagnostics. Sequencing of leukocyte DNA was performed for the 94 HTS genes of the Illumina TruSight™Cancer Panel and 54 additional HTS genes. The sensitivity of the panel to identify known germline variants was 99.6%. In addition to known mutations, a total of 192 rare, potentially pathogenic germline variants in 86 genes were identified. Neither the proportion of rare variants per patient (group K: 0.9 variants; group U: 0.8 variants) nor the proportion of variants in the most frequently mutated, moderately penetrant genes CHEK2 and ATM showed significant inter-group difference. Four of the five patients from group U with a truncating CHEK2 mutation had thyroid cancer, pointing to a broader tumor spectrum in patients with pathogenic CHEK2 variants. In 22% of patients from group K, a further potential causative variant was identified. Here, the most interesting finding was an NF1 nonsense mutation in a child with a known TP53 frameshift mutation. In 17% of patients from group U, potential causative variants were identified. In three of these patients (2%), mutations in PMS2, PTEN, or POLD1 were considered to be causative. In both groups, incidental findings with presumptive predictive value were generated. The gene panel identified the genetic cause in some prescreened, unexplained HTS patients and generated incidental findings. Some patients harbored predicted pathogenic mutations in more than one established HTS gene, rendering interpretation of the respective alterations challenging. Established moderate risk genes showed an almost equal distribution among patients with known and unexplained disease.

Background: Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) have been used to stratify colorectal cancer (CRC) risk in the general population, whereas its role in Lynch syndrome (LS), the most common type of hereditary CRC, is still conflicting. We aimed to assess the ability of PRS to refine CRC risk prediction in European-descendant individuals with LS. Methods: 1465 individuals with LS (557 MLH1, 517 MSH2/EPCAM, 299 MSH6 and 92 PMS2) and 5656 CRC-free population-based controls from two independent cohorts were included. A 91-SNP PRS was applied. A Cox proportional hazard regression model with ‘family’ as a random effect and a logistic regression analysis, followed by a meta-analysis combining both cohorts were conducted. Results: Overall, we did not observe a statistically significant association between PRS and CRC risk in the entire cohort. Nevertheless, PRS was significantly associated with a slightly increased risk of CRC or advanced adenoma (AA), in those with CRC diagnosed <50 years and in individuals with multiple CRCs or AAs diagnosed <60 years. Conclusion: The PRS may slightly influence CRC risk in individuals with LS in particular in more extreme phenotypes such as early-onset disease. However, the study design and recruitment strategy strongly influence the results of PRS studies. A separate analysis by genes and its combination with other genetic and non-genetic risk factors will help refine its role as a risk modifier in LS.