scholarly journals MLH1 promoter hypermethylation predicts poorer prognosis in mismatch repair deficiency endometrial carcinomas

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enami Kaneko ◽  
Naoki Sato ◽  
Tae Sugawara ◽  
Aya Noto ◽  
Kazue Takahashi ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
pp. jmedgenet-2020-107542
Author(s):  
D Gareth Evans ◽  
Fiona Lalloo ◽  
Neil AJ Ryan ◽  
Naomi Bowers ◽  
Kate Green ◽  
...  

BackgroundTesting cancers for mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) by immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a quick and inexpensive means of triaging individuals for germline Lynch syndrome testing. The aim of this study was to evaluate tumour dMMR and the prevalence of Lynch syndrome in patients referred to the Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, which serves a population of 5.6 million.MethodsTumour testing used IHC for MMR proteins with targeted BRAF and MLH1 promotor methylation testing followed by germline mutation and somatic testing as appropriate.ResultsIn total, 3694 index tumours were tested by IHC (2204 colorectal cancers (CRCs), 739 endometrial cancers (ECs) and 761 other), of which 672/3694 (18.2%) had protein loss, including 348 (9.4%) with MLH1 loss. MLH1 loss was significantly higher for 739 ECs (15%) vs 2204 CRCs (10%) (p=0.0003) and was explained entirely by higher rates of somatic MLH1 promoter hypermethylation (87% vs 41%, p<0.0001). Overall, 65/134 (48.5%) patients with MLH1 loss and no MLH1 hypermethylation or BRAF c.1799T>A had constitutional MLH1 pathogenic variants. Of 456 patients with tumours showing loss of MSH2/MSH6, 216 (47.3%) had germline pathogenic variants in either gene. Isolated PMS2 loss was most suggestive of a germline MMR variant in 19/26 (73%). Of those with no germline pathogenic variant, somatic testing identified likely causal variants in 34/48 (71%) with MLH1 loss and in MSH2/MSH6 in 40/47 (85%) with MSH2/MSH6 loss.ConclusionsReflex testing of EC/CRC leads to uncertain diagnoses in many individuals with dMMR following IHC but without germline pathogenic variants or MLH1 hypermethylation. Tumour mutation testing is effective at decreasing this by identifying somatic dMMR in >75% of cases.


2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ghassan Allo ◽  
Marcus Q Bernardini ◽  
Ren-Chin Wu ◽  
Ie-Ming Shih ◽  
Steve Kalloger ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
pp. jmedgenet-2020-107270
Author(s):  
Emma J Crosbie ◽  
Neil A J Ryan ◽  
Rhona J McVey ◽  
Fiona Lalloo ◽  
Naomi Bowers ◽  
...  

BackgroundHereditary causes of ovarian cancer include Lynch syndrome, which is due to inherited pathogenic variants affecting one of the four mismatch repair genes involved in DNA repair. The aim of this study was to evaluate tumour mismatch repair deficiency and prevalence of Lynch syndrome in high-risk women referred to the Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine with ovarian cancer over the past 20 years.MethodsWomen with ovarian cancer diagnosed before the age of 35 years and/or with a suggestive personal or family history of Lynch syndrome cancers underwent tumour testing with immunohistochemistry for mismatch repair deficiency and, where indicated, MLH1 promoter methylation testing followed by constitutional testing for Lynch syndrome.ResultsIn total, 261 ovarian cancers were tested and 27 (10.3%; 95% CI 6.9% to 14.7%) showed mismatch repair deficiency by immunohistochemistry. Three of 7 with MLH1 loss showed MLH1 promoter hypermethylation, and 18 of the remaining 24 underwent constitutional testing for Lynch syndrome. A further 15 women with mismatch repair proficient tumours underwent constitutional testing because of a strong family history of Lynch syndrome cancers. Pathogenic variants were identified in 9/33 (27%) women who underwent constitutional testing, aged 33–59 years (median 48 years), including one whose tumour was mismatch repair proficient. Most Lynch syndrome tumours were of endometrioid histological subtype.ConclusionsTumour mismatch repair deficiency identified by immunohistochemistry is a useful prescreen for constitutional testing in women with ovarian cancer with personal or family histories suggestive of Lynch syndrome.


2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (01) ◽  
pp. E2-E89
Author(s):  
B Goeppert ◽  
S Roessler ◽  
M Renner ◽  
S Singer ◽  
A Mehrabi ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document