Background: The selection of patients for genetic testing to rule out Lynch syndrome is currently based on fulfilment of at least one of the revised Bethesda criteria followed by mismatch repair (MMR) status analysis. A study was undertaken to compare the present approach with universal MMR study-based strategies to detect Lynch syndrome in a large series of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods: 2093 patients with CRC from the EPICOLON I and II cohorts were included. Immunohistochemistry for MMR proteins and/or microsatellite instability (MSI) analysis was performed in tumour tissue. Germline MLH1 and MSH2 mutation analysis was performed in patients whose tumours showed loss of MLH1 or MSH2 staining, respectively. MSH6 genetic testing was done in patients whose tumours showed lack of MSH6 expression or a combined lack of MSH2 and MSH6 expression but did not have MSH2 mutations. PMS2 genetic testing was performed in patients showing isolated loss of PMS2 expression. In patients with MSI tumours and normal or not available MMR protein expression, all four MMR genes were studied. Results: A total of 180 patients (8.6%) showed loss of expression of some of the MMR proteins and/or MSI. Four hundred and eighty-six patients (23.2%) met some of the revised Bethesda criteria. Of the 14 (0.7%) patients who had a MMR gene mutation, 12 fulfilled at least one of the revised Bethesda criteria and two (14.3%) did not. Conclusions: Routine molecular screening of patients with CRC for Lynch syndrome using immunohistochemistry or MSI has better sensitivity for detecting mutation carriers than the Bethesda guidelines.

Germline mutations in DNA polymerase ɛ (POLE) and δ (POLD1) have been recently identified in families with multiple colorectal adenomas and colorectal cancer (CRC). All reported cases carried POLE c.1270C>G (p.Leu424Val) or POLD1 c.1433G>A (p.Ser478Asn) mutations. Due to the scarcity of cases reported so far, an accurate clinical phenotype has not been defined. We aimed to assess the prevalence of these recurrent mutations in unexplained familial and early-onset CRC and polyposis, and to add additional information to define the clinical characteristics of mutated cases. A total of 858 familial/early onset CRC and polyposis patients were studied: 581 familial and early-onset CRC cases without mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency, 86 cases with MMR deficiency and 191 polyposis cases. Mutation screening was performed by KASPar genotyping assays and/or Sanger sequencing of the involved exons. POLE p.L424V was identified in a 28-year-old polyposis and CRC patient, as a de novo mutation. None of the 858 cases studied carried POLD1 p.S478N. A new mutation, POLD1 c.1421T>C (p.Leu474Pro), was identified in a mismatch repair proficient Amsterdam II family. Its pathogenicity was supported by cosegregation in the family, in silico predictions, and previously published yeast assays. POLE and POLD1 mutations explain a fraction of familial CRC and polyposis. Sequencing the proofreading domains of POLE and POLD1 should be considered in routine genetic diagnostics. Until additional evidence is gathered, POLE and POLD1 genetic testing should not be restricted to polyposis cases, and the presence of de novo mutations, considered.

Lynch syndrome (LS) is a hereditary condition that increases the risk for endometrial and other cancers. The identification of endometrial cancer (EC) patients with LS has the potential to influence life-saving interventions. We aimed to study the prevalence of LS among EC patients in our population. Universal screening for LS was applied for a consecutive series EC. Tumor testing using microsatellite instability (MSI), immunohistochemistry (IHC) for mismatch-repair (MMR) protein expression and MLH1-methylation analysis, when required, was used to select LS-suspicious cases. Sequencing of corresponding MMR genes was performed. One hundred and seventy-three EC (average age, 63 years) were screened. Sixty-one patients (35%) had abnormal IHC or MSI results. After MLH1 methylation analysis, 27 cases were considered suspicious of LS. From these, 22 were contacted and referred for genetic counseling. Nineteen pursued genetic testing and eight were diagnosed of LS. Mutations were more frequent in younger patients (<50 yrs). Three cases had either intact IHC or MSS and reinforce the need of implement the EC screening with both techniques. The prevalence of LS among EC patients was 4.6% (8/173); with a predictive frequency of 6.6% in the Spanish population. Universal screening of EC for LS is recommended.

Purpose: The present study aimed to determine the prevalence of MUTYH mutations in patients with multiple colonic polyps and to explore the best strategy for diagnosing MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP) in these patients. Experimental Design: This study included 405 patients with at least 10 colonic polyps each. All cases were genetically tested for the three most frequent MUTYH mutations. Whole-gene analysis was performed in heterozygous patients and in 216 patients lacking the three most frequent mutations. Polyps from 56 patients were analyzed for the KRAS-Gly12Cys and BRAF V600E somatic mutations. Results: Twenty-seven (6.7%) patients were diagnosed with MAP, of which 40.8% showed serrated polyps. The sensitivity of studying only the three common variants was 74.1%. Of 216 patients without any monoallelic mutation in common variants, whole-gene analysis revealed biallelic pathogenic mutation in only one. G396D mutation was associated with serrated lesions and older age at diagnosis. There was a strong association between germinal MUTYH mutation and KRAS Gly12Cys somatic mutation in polyps. BRAF V600E mutation was found in 74% of serrated polyps in MUTYH-negative patients and in none of the polyps of MAP patients. Conclusions: We observed a low frequency of MUTYH mutations among patients with multiple adenomatous and serrated polyps. The MAP phenotype frequently included patients with serrated polyps, especially when G396D mutation was involved. Our results show that somatic molecular markers of polyps can be useful in identifying MAP cases and support the need for the complete MUTYH gene analysis only in patients heterozygous for recurrent variants. Clin Cancer Res; 20(5); 1158–68. ©2014 AACR.

Aberrant hypermethylation of cancer-related genes has emerged as a promising strategy for the development of diagnostic, prognostic and predictive biomarkers in human cancer, including colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of this study was to perform a systematic and comprehensive analysis of a panel of CRC-specific genes as potential diagnostic, prognostic and predictive biomarkers in a large, population-based CRC cohort. Methylation status of the SEPT9, TWIST1, IGFBP3, GAS7, ALX4 and miR137 genes was studied by quantitative bisulfite pyrosequencing in a population-based cohort of 425 CRC patients. Methylation levels of all genes analyzed were significantly higher in tumor tissues compared to normal mucosa (p<0.0001); however, cancer-associated hypermethylation was most frequently observed for miR137 (86.7%) and IGFBP3 (83%) in CRC patients. Methylation analysis using the combination of these two genes demonstrated greatest accuracy for the identification of colonic tumors (sensitivity 95.5%; specificity 90.5%). Low levels of IGFBP3 promoter methylation emerged as an independent risk factor for predicting poor disease free survival in stage II and III CRC patients (HR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.28–0.85, p = 0.01). Our results also suggest that stage II & III CRC patients with high levels of IGFBP3 methylation do not benefit from adjuvant 5FU-based chemotherapy. By analyzing a large, population-based CRC cohort, we demonstrate the potential clinical significance of miR137 and IGFBP3 hypermethylation as promising diagnostic biomarkers in CRC. Our data also revealed that IGFBP3 hypermethylation may serve as an independent prognostic and predictive biomarker in stage II and III CRC patients.

Background The prevalence of MLH1 constitutional epimutations in the general population is unknown. We sought to analyse the prevalence of MLH1 constitutional epimutations in unselected and selected series of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods Patients with diagnoses of CRC (n=2123) were included in the unselected group. For comparison, a group of 847 selected patients with CRC who fulfilled the revised Bethesda guidelines (rBG) were also included. Somatic and constitutional MLH1 methylation was assayed via methylation-specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification of cases lacking MLH1 expression. Germline alterations in mismatch-repair (MMR) genes were assessed via Sanger sequencing and methylation-specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification. Results Loss of MLH1 expression occurred in 5.5% of the unselected series and 12.5% of the selected series (p<0.0001). No constitutional epimutations in MLH1 were detected in the unselected population (0/62); five cases from the selected series were positive for MLH1 epimutations (15.6%, 5/32; p=0.004). Conclusions Our results suggest a negligible prevalence of MLH1 constitutional epimutations in unselected cases of CRC. Therefore, MLH1 constitutional epimutation analysis should be conducted only for patients who fulfil the rBG and who lack MLH1 expression with methylated MLH1.