The Impact of Patient Support Programs in Europe: A Systematic Literature Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patient support programs aim to provide solutions beyond the medication itself, by enhancing treatment adherence, improving clinical outcomes, elevating patient experience, and/or increasing quality of life. As patient support programs increasingly play an important role in assisting patients, numerous observational studies and pragmatic trials designed to evaluate their impact on healthcare have been conducted in recent years. This review aims to characterize these studies. METHODS: A systematic literature review, supplemented by a broad search of gray literature, was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and Cochrane recommendations. Observational studies and pragmatic trials conducted in Europe to evaluate the impact of patient support programs, published in English or Spanish between 17/03/2010 and 17/03/2020, were reviewed. Two patient support program definitions were applied starting with Ganguli et al.'s broad approach, followed by the European Medicines Agency definition, narrowed to Marketing Authorization Holders organized systems and their medicines. The quality of publications was assessed using the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement 22-item checklist. RESULTS: Of the 49 identified studies following the Ganguli et al. definition, 20 studies met the European Medicines Agency definition and were reviewed. Patient support program impact was evaluated based on a wide range of methodologies: 70% assessed patient support program-related patient-reported outcomes, 55% reported clinical outcomes, and 25% reported economic impacts on health resources. Only 45% conducted a comparative analysis. Overall, 75% of the studies achieved their proposed objectives. CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity of the observational studies reviewed reflects the complexity of patient support programs that are built ad hoc for specific diseases, treatments, and patients. Results suggest that patient support programs play a key role in promoting treatment effectiveness, clinical outcomes, and satisfaction. However, there is a need for standardizing the definition of patient support programs and the methods to evaluate their impact.

Additional Value of Patient-Reported Symptom Monitoring in Cancer Care: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: To describe the benefit of patient-reported symptom monitoring on clinical, other patient-reported, and economic outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review using Medline/PubMed, limited to original articles published between 2011 and 2021 in English and Spanish, and focused on the benefit of patient-reported symptom monitoring on cancer patients. RESULTS: We identified 16 reports that deal with the benefit of patient-reported symptom monitoring (collected mostly electronically) on different outcomes. Five studies showed that patient-reported symptom surveillance led to significantly improved survival compared with usual care-mainly through better symptom control, early detection of tumor recurrence, and extended chemotherapy use. Additionally, three evaluations demonstrated an improvement in Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) associated with this monitoring strategy, specifically by reducing symptom severity. Additionally, six studies observed that this monitoring approach prevented unplanned emergency room visits and hospital readmissions, leading to a substantial decrease in healthcare usage. CONCLUSIONS: There is consistent evidence across the studies that patient-reported symptom monitoring might entail a substantial survival benefit for cancer patients, better HRQoL, and a considerable decrease in healthcare usage. Nonetheless, more studies should be conducted to demonstrate their effectiveness in addition to their cost-effectiveness in clinical practice.

TFAP2E Methylation and Expression Status Does Not Predict Response to 5-FU-based Chemotherapy in Colorectal Cancer.

Purpose: A recent study reported that 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy is less effective in treating patients with advanced colorectal cancer demonstrating hypermethylation of the TFAP2E gene. The aim of our study was to confirm and validate these findings in large, uniformly treated, well-characterized patient cohorts.Experimental Design: Two cohorts of 783 patients with colorectal cancer: 532 from a population-based, multicenter cohort (EPICOLON I) and 251 patients from a clinic-based trial were used to study the effectiveness of TFAP2E methylation and expression as a predictor of response of colorectal cancer patients to 5-FU-based chemotherapy. DNA methylation status of the TFAP2E gene in patients with colorectal cancer was assessed by quantitative bisulfite pyrosequencing analysis. IHC analysis of the TFAP2E protein expression was also performed.Results: Correlation between TFAP2E methylation status and IHC staining was performed in 607 colorectal cancer samples. Among 357 hypermethylated tumors, only 141 (39.6%) exhibited loss of protein expression. Survival was not affected by TFAP2E hypermethylation in stage IV patients [HR, 1.21; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.79-1.87; log-rank P = 0.6]. In stage II-III cases, disease-free survival was not influenced by TFAP2E hypermethylation status in 5-FU-treated (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.52-1.59; log-rank P = 0.9) as well as in nontreated patients (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.5-1.54; log-rank P = 0.7).Conclusions:TFAP2E hypermethylation does not correlate with loss of its protein expression. Our large, systematic, and comprehensive study indicates that TFAP2E methylation and expression may not play a major role in predicting response to 5-FU-based chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res; 24(12); 2820-7. ©2018 AACR.

Novel Mutations in MLH1 and MSH2 Genes in Mexican Patients with Lynch Syndrome.

Background. Lynch Syndrome (LS) is characterized by germline mutations in the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2. This syndrome is inherited in an autosomal dominant pattern and is characterized by early onset colorectal cancer (CRC) and extracolonic tumors. The aim of this study was to identify mutations in MMR genes in three Mexican patients with LS. Methods. Immunohistochemical analysis was performed as a prescreening method to identify absent protein expression. PCR, Denaturing High Performance Liquid Chromatography (dHPLC), and Sanger sequencing complemented the analysis. Results. Two samples showed the absence of nuclear staining for MLH1 and one sample showed loss of nuclear staining for MSH2. The mutations found in MLH1 gene were c.2103+1G>C in intron 18 and compound heterozygous mutants c.1852_1854delAAG (p.K618del) and c.1852_1853delinsGC (p.K618A) in exon 16. In the MSH2 gene, we identified mutation c.638dupT (p.L213fs) in exon 3. Conclusions. This is the first report of mutations in MMR genes in Mexican patients with LS and these appear to be novel.

Prevalence of MLH1 constitutional epimutations as a cause of Lynch syndrome in unselected versus selected consecutive series of patients with colorectal cancer.

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.

IGFBP3 methylation is a novel diagnostic and predictive biomarker in colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: 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. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.

Prevalence and characteristics of MUTYH-associated polyposis in patients with multiple adenomatous and serrated polyps.

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.

Prevalence of Lynch syndrome among patients with newly diagnosed endometrial cancers.

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.

Clinical subtypes and molecular characteristics of serrated polyposis syndrome.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We investigated clinical and molecular differences between the different phenotypes of serrated polyposis syndrome (SPS) and the frequency of mutations in BRAF or KRAS in polyps from patients with SPS. METHODS: We collected data on clinical and demographic characteristics of 50 patients who fulfilled the criteria for SPS. Polymerase chain reaction and sequence analysis were used to identify BRAF and KRAS mutations in 432 polyps collected from 37 patients; we analyzed CpG island methylator phenotypes in 272 of these polyps. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (30%) had type 1 SPS and 35 had type 2 SPS. There were no significant differences in age at diagnosis, sex, smoking frequency, body mass index, or colorectal cancer predisposition between groups of patients, or in the pathologic or molecular characteristics of their polyps. A familial history of colorectal cancer or colonic polyps was reported more frequently by patients with type 2 SPS. BRAF mutations were found in 63% of polyps and KRAS mutations were found in 9.9%; 43.4% of polyps had the CpG island methylator phenotype-high phenotype. A per-patient analysis revealed that all patients had a BRAF or KRAS mutation in more than 25% of their polyps; 84.8% of patients had a mutation in BRAF or KRAS in more than 50% of their polyps. CONCLUSIONS: Except for a greater likelihood of familial history of colorectal cancer or colonic polyps in patients with type 2 SPS, we found no significant demographic, pathologic, or molecular differences between types 1 and 2 SPS. All patients had a BRAF or KRAS mutation in at least 25% of their polyps.

Risk of cancer in cases of suspected lynch syndrome without germline mutation.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colorectal cancers (CRCs) with microsatellite instability (MSI) and a mismatch repair (MMR) immunohistochemical deficit without hypermethylation of the MLH1 promoter are likely to be caused by Lynch syndrome. Some patients with these cancers have not been found to have pathogenic germline mutations and are considered to have Lynch-like syndrome (LLS). The aim of this study was to determine the risk of cancer in families of patients with LLS. METHODS: We studied a population-based cohort of 1705 consecutive patients, performing MSI tests and immunohistochemical analyses of MMR proteins. Patients were diagnosed with Lynch syndrome when they were found to have pathogenic germline mutations. Patients with MSI and loss of MSH2 and/or MSH6 expression, isolated loss of PMS2 or loss of MLH1 without MLH1 promoter hypermethylation, and no pathogenic mutation were considered to have LLS. The clinical characteristics of patients and the age- and sex-adjusted standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) of cancer in families were compared between groups. RESULTS: The incidence of CRC was significantly lower in families of patients with LLS than in families with confirmed cases of Lynch syndrome (SIR for Lynch syndrome, 6.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.58-9.54; SIR for LLS, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.16-3.56; P < .001). However, the incidence of CRC was higher in families of patients with LLS than in families with sporadic CRC (SIR for sporadic CRC, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.27-0.79; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of cancer in families with LLS is lower that of families with Lynch syndrome but higher than that of families with sporadic CRC. These results confirm the need for special screening and surveillance strategies for these patients and their relatives.

Comparison between universal molecular screening for Lynch syndrome and revised Bethesda guidelines in a large population-based cohort of patients with colorectal cancer.

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.

Evidence for classification of c.1852_1853AA>GC in MLH1 as a neutral variant for Lynch syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome (LS) is an autosomal dominant inherited cancer syndrome characterized by early onset cancers of the colorectum, endometrium and other tumours. A significant proportion of DNA variants in LS patients are unclassified. Reports on the pathogenicity of the c.1852_1853AA>GC (p.Lys618Ala) variant of the MLH1 gene are conflicting. In this study, we provide new evidence indicating that this variant has no significant implications for LS. METHODS: The following approach was used to assess the clinical significance of the p.Lys618Ala variant: frequency in a control population, case-control comparison, co-occurrence of the p.Lys618Ala variant with a pathogenic mutation, co-segregation with the disease and microsatellite instability in tumours from carriers of the variant. We genotyped p.Lys618Ala in 1034 individuals (373 sporadic colorectal cancer [CRC] patients, 250 index subjects from families suspected of having LS [revised Bethesda guidelines] and 411 controls). Three well-characterized LS families that fulfilled the Amsterdam II Criteria and consisted of members with the p.Lys618Ala variant were included to assess co-occurrence and co-segregation. A subset of colorectal tumour DNA samples from 17 patients carrying the p.Lys618Ala variant was screened for microsatellite instability using five mononucleotide markers. RESULTS: Twenty-seven individuals were heterozygous for the p.Lys618Ala variant; nine had sporadic CRC (2.41%), seven were suspected of having hereditary CRC (2.8%) and 11 were controls (2.68%). There were no significant associations in the case-control and case-case studies. The p.Lys618Ala variant was co-existent with pathogenic mutations in two unrelated LS families. In one family, the allele distribution of the pathogenic and unclassified variant was in trans, in the other family the pathogenic variant was detected in the MSH6 gene and only the deleterious variant co-segregated with the disease in both families. Only two positive cases of microsatellite instability (2/17, 11.8%) were detected in tumours from p.Lys618Ala carriers, indicating that this variant does not play a role in functional inactivation of MLH1 in CRC patients. CONCLUSIONS: The p.Lys618Ala variant should be considered a neutral variant for LS. These findings have implications for the clinical management of CRC probands and their relatives.

5-Fluorouracil adjuvant chemotherapy does not increase survival in patients with CpG island methylator phenotype colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU)-based adjuvant chemotherapy does not increase survival times of patients with colorectal tumors with microsatellite instability. We determined the response of patients with colorectal tumors with the CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) to 5-FU-based therapy. METHODS: We analyzed a population-based cohort of 302 patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) for a median follow-up time of 50.7 months. CIMP status was determined by analysis of the CACNAG1, SOCS1, RUNX3, NEUROG1, and MLH1 promoters; tumors were considered to be CIMP positive if at least 3 promoters were methylated. RESULTS: Tumors from 29.5% of patients (89/302) were CIMP positive; CIMP status did not influence disease-free survival (DFS; log-rank = 0.3). Of tumors of TNM stages II-III (n = 196), 32.7% were CIMP positive. Among patients with stages II-III CRC who did not receive adjuvant 5-FU chemotherapy, those with CIMP-positive tumors had longest times of DFS (log-rank = 0.04); In patients who received chemotherapy, those with CIMP-positive tumors had shorter times of DFS (log-rank = 0.02). In patients with CIMP-negative tumors, adjuvant 5-FU chemotherapy significantly increased time of DFS (log-rank = 0.00001). However, in patients with CIMP-positive tumors, adjuvant 5-FU chemotherapy did not affect time of DFS (log-rank = 0.7). Multivariate analysis showed a significant, independent interaction between 5-FU treatment and CIMP status (hazard ratio [HR], 0.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-0.8). Among patients with CIMP-positive tumors, adjuvant chemotherapy was not an independent predictor of outcome (HR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.3-2.0). In patients who did not receive adjuvant 5-FU chemotherapy, CIMP status was the only independent predictor of survival (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.8). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CIMP-positive colorectal tumors do not benefit from 5-FU-based adjuvant chemotherapy.

EPCAM germ line deletions as causes of Lynch syndrome in Spanish patients.

The standard genetic test for Lynch syndrome (LS) frequently reveals an absence of pathogenic mutations in DNA mismatch repair genes known to be associated with LS. It was recently shown that germ line deletions in the last exons of EPCAM are involved in the etiology of LS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of EPCAM deletions in a Spanish population and the clinical implications of deletion. Probands from 501 families suspected of having LS were enrolled in the study. Twenty-five cases with MSH2 loss were identified: 10 had mutations of MSH2, five had mutations of MSH6, and 10 did not show MSH2/MSH6 mutations. These 25 cases were analyzed for EPCAM deletions using multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification, and deletions were mapped using long-range PCR analysis. One subject with no MSH2/MSH6 mutations had a large deletion in the EPCAM locus that extended for 8.7 kb and included exons 8 and 9. The tumor exhibited MSH2 promoter hypermethylation. EPCAM deletion analysis followed by MSH2 methylation testing of the tumor is a fast low-cost procedure that can be used to identify mutations that cause LS. We propose that this procedure be incorporated into clinical genetic analysis strategies and present a decision-support flow diagram for the diagnosis of LS.

Methylation analysis of MLH1 improves the selection of patients for genetic testing in Lynch syndrome.

Inactivation of MLH1 due to promoter hypermethylation strongly suggests a sporadic origin, providing exclusion criteria for Lynch syndrome. The aim of this study is to compare the utility of methylation analysis of MLH1 and BRAF V600E mutations for the selection of patients with MLH1 negative colorectal cancer for genetic testing. MLH1 methylation status was evaluated by MethyLight and methylation-specific MLPA (MS-MLPA) in tumor DNA from 73 colorectal cancer patients with loss of MLH1 protein expression. These tumors were analyzed for BRAF V600E mutations, and genetic testing for germline MLH1 mutations was performed in all corresponding patients. Ten patients had germline mutations in MLH1 and none of their tumors showed significant MLH1 methylation or BRAF V600E mutation. MLH1 genetic testing excluded patients by MethyLight in 47 patients (64%), by MS-MLPA in 49 (67%), and BRAF V600E mutation in only 25 patients (34%) (chi(2) P = 0.00001). Specificity was 75% for MethyLight, 78% for MS-MLPA and 40% for BRAF V600E mutation. The use of MethyLight or MS-MLPA instead of BRAF mutation resulted in a cost reduction of 41% and 45%, respectively, per every MLH1 mutation detected. Taken together, methylation analysis of MLH1 shows better performance characteristics than BRAF V600E mutation in the selection of patients for genetic testing of MLH1, especially when using MS-MLPA.

Utility of p16 immunohistochemistry for the identification of Lynch syndrome.

PURPOSE: Immunohistochemistry for mismatch repair proteins has shown utility in the identification of Lynch syndrome, but majority of tumors with loss of MLH1 expression are due to sporadic hypermethylation of the MLH1 promoter. These tumors can also show epigenetic silencing of other genes, such as p16. The aim of our study is to evaluate the utility of p16 immunohistochemistry in the prediction of MLH1 germline mutations. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: p16 immunohistochemistry was appropriately evaluated in 79 colorectal cancers with loss of MLH1 expression. Methylation of MLH1 and p16 were quantitatively studied using real-time PCR assay Methylight. BRAF V600E mutation in tumor tissue was also investigated. Genetic testing for germline mutation of MLH1 was made on 52 patients. RESULTS: Loss of p16 expression was seen in 21 of 79 samples (26.6%). There was found statistically significant association between p16 expression and p16 methylation (P < 0.001), MLH1 methylation (P < 0.001), and BRAF mutation (P < 0.005). All tumors with loss of p16 expression showed hypermethylation of p16 (21 of 21), 95.2% (20 of 21) showed MLH1 methylation, and 71.4% (15 of 21) were mutated for BRAF V600E. Mutational analysis showed pathogenic germline mutations in 8 of the patients, harboring 10 tumors. All 10 of these tumors showed normal staining of p16 in the immunochemical analysis. CONCLUSIONS: p16 immunohistochemistry is a good surrogate marker for p16 and MLH1 epigenetic silencing due to hypermethylation, and is useful as screening tool in the selection of patients for genetic testing in Lynch syndrome.