Germline predisposition to haematological malignancies: Best practice consensus guidelines from the UK Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG), CanGene-CanVar and the NHS England Haematological Oncology Working Group.

The implementation of whole genome sequencing and large somatic gene panels in haematological malignancies is identifying an increasing number of individuals with either potential or confirmed germline predisposition to haematological malignancy. There are currently no national or international best practice guidelines with respect to management of carriers of such variants or of their at-risk relatives. To address this gap, the UK Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG), CanGene-CanVar and the NHS England Haematological Oncology Working Group held a workshop over two days on 28-29th April 2022, with the aim of establishing consensus guidelines on relevant clinical and laboratory pathways. The workshop focussed on the management of disease-causing germline variation in the following genes: DDX41, CEBPA, RUNX1, ANKRD26, ETV6, GATA2. Using a pre-workshop survey followed by structured discussion and in-meeting polling, we achieved consensus for UK best practice in several areas. In particular, high consensus was achieved on issues regarding standardised reporting, variant classification, multidisciplinary team working and patient support. The best practice recommendations from this meeting may be applicable to an expanding number of other genes in this setting.

Diagnostic test accuracy and cost-effectiveness of tests for codeletion of chromosomal arms 1p and 19q in people with glioma.

BACKGROUND: Complete deletion of both the short arm of chromosome 1 (1p) and the long arm of chromosome 19 (19q), known as 1p/19q codeletion, is a mutation that can occur in gliomas. It occurs in a type of glioma known as oligodendroglioma and its higher grade counterpart known as anaplastic oligodendroglioma. Detection of 1p/19q codeletion in gliomas is important because, together with another mutation in an enzyme known as isocitrate dehydrogenase, it is needed to make the diagnosis of an oligodendroglioma. Presence of 1p/19q codeletion also informs patient prognosis and prediction of the best drug treatment. The main two tests in use are fluorescent in situ hybridisation (FISH) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based loss of heterozygosity (LOH) assays (also known as PCR-based short tandem repeat or microsatellite analysis). Many other tests are available. None of the tests is perfect, although PCR-based LOH is expected to have very high sensitivity. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the sensitivity and specificity and cost-effectiveness of different deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)-based techniques for determining 1p/19q codeletion status in glioma. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and BIOSIS up to July 2019. There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication. We sought economic evaluation studies from the results of this search and using the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included cross-sectional studies in adults with glioma or any subtype of glioma, presenting raw data or cross-tabulations of two or more DNA-based tests for 1p/19q codeletion. We also sought economic evaluations of these tests. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed procedures outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Diagnostic Test Accuracy Reviews. Two review authors independently screened titles/abstracts/full texts, performed data extraction, and undertook applicability and risk of bias assessments using QUADAS-2. Meta-analyses used the hierarchical summary ROC model to estimate and compare test accuracy. We used FISH and PCR-based LOH as alternate reference standards to examine how tests compared with those in common use, and conducted a latent class analysis comparing FISH and PCR-based LOH. We constructed an economic model to evaluate cost-effectiveness. MAIN RESULTS: We included 53 studies examining: PCR-based LOH, FISH, single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array, next-generation sequencing (NGS), comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH), array comparative genomic hybridisation (aCGH), multiplex-ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA), real-time PCR, chromogenic in situ hybridisation (CISH), mass spectrometry (MS), restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis, G-banding, methylation array and NanoString. Risk of bias was low for only one study; most gave us concerns about how patients were selected or about missing data. We had applicability concerns about many of the studies because only patients with specific subtypes of glioma were included. 1520 participants contributed to analyses using FISH as the reference, 1304 participants to analyses involving PCR-based LOH as the reference and 262 participants to analyses of comparisons between methods from studies not including FISH or PCR-based LOH. Most evidence was available for comparison of FISH with PCR-based LOH (15 studies, 915 participants): PCR-based LOH detected 94% of FISH-determined codeletions (95% credible interval (CrI) 83% to 98%) and FISH detected 91% of codeletions determined by PCR-based LOH (CrI 78% to 97%). Of tumours determined not to have a deletion by FISH, 94% (CrI 87% to 98%) had a deletion detected by PCR-based LOH, and of those determined not to have a deletion by PCR-based LOH, 96% (CrI 90% to 99%) had a deletion detected by FISH. The latent class analysis suggested that PCR-based LOH may be slightly more accurate than FISH. Most other techniques appeared to have high sensitivity (i.e. produced few false-negative results) for detection of 1p/19q codeletion when either FISH or PCR-based LOH was considered as the reference standard, although there was limited evidence. There was some indication of differences in specificity (false-positive rate) with some techniques. Both NGS and SNP array had high specificity when considered against FISH as the reference standard (NGS: 6 studies, 243 participants; SNP: 6 studies, 111 participants), although we rated certainty in the evidence as low or very low. NGS and SNP array also had high specificity when PCR-based LOH was considered the reference standard, although with much more uncertainty as these results were based on fewer studies (just one study with 49 participants for NGS and two studies with 33 participants for SNP array). G-banding had low sensitivity and specificity when PCR-based LOH was the reference standard. Although MS had very high sensitivity and specificity when both FISH and PCR-based LOH were considered the reference standard, these results were based on only one study with a small number of participants. Real-time PCR also showed high specificity with FISH as a reference standard, although there were only two studies including 40 participants. We found no relevant economic evaluations. Our economic model using FISH as the reference standard suggested that the resource-optimising test depends on which measure of diagnostic accuracy is most important. With FISH as the reference standard, MLPA is likely to be cost-effective if society was willing to pay GBP 1000 or less for a true positive detected. However, as the value placed on a true positive increased, CISH was most cost-effective. Findings differed when the outcome measure changed to either true negative detected or correct diagnosis. When PCR-based LOH was used as the reference standard, MLPA was likely to be cost-effective for all measures of diagnostic accuracy at lower threshold values for willingness to pay. However, as the threshold values increased, none of the tests were clearly more likely to be considered cost-effective. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In our review, most techniques (except G-banding) appeared to have good sensitivity (few false negatives) for detection of 1p/19q codeletions in glioma against both FISH and PCR-based LOH as a reference standard. However, we judged the certainty of the evidence low or very low for all the tests. There are possible differences in specificity, with both NGS and SNP array having high specificity (fewer false positives) for 1p/19q codeletion when considered against FISH as the reference standard. The economic analysis should be interpreted with caution due to the small number of studies.

Diagnostic accuracy of 1p/19q codeletion tests in oligodendroglioma: A comprehensive meta-analysis based on a Cochrane systematic review.

Codeletion of chromosomal arms 1p and 19q, in conjunction with a mutation in the isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 or 2 gene, is the molecular diagnostic criterion for oligodendroglioma, IDH mutant and 1p/19q codeleted. 1p/19q codeletion is a diagnostic marker and allows prognostication and prediction of the best drug response within IDH-mutant tumours. We performed a Cochrane review and simple economic analysis to establish the most sensitive, specific and cost-effective techniques for determining 1p/19q codeletion status. Fluorescent in situ hybridisation (FISH) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based loss of heterozygosity (LOH) test methods were considered as reference standard. Most techniques (FISH, chromogenic in situ hybridisation [CISH], PCR, real-time PCR, multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification [MLPA], single nucleotide polymorphism [SNP] array, comparative genomic hybridisation [CGH], array CGH, next-generation sequencing [NGS], mass spectrometry and NanoString) showed good sensitivity (few false negatives) for detection of 1p/19q codeletions in glioma, irrespective of whether FISH or PCR-based LOH was used as the reference standard. Both NGS and SNP array had a high specificity (fewer false positives) for 1p/19q codeletion when considered against FISH as the reference standard. Our findings suggest that G banding is not a suitable test for 1p/19q analysis. Within these limits, considering cost per diagnosis and using FISH as a reference, MLPA was marginally more cost-effective than other tests, although these economic analyses were limited by the range of available parameters, time horizon and data from multiple healthcare organisations.

MGMT promoter methylation testing to predict overall survival in people with glioblastoma treated with temozolomide: a comprehensive meta-analysis based on a Cochrane Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The DNA repair protein O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) causes resistance of tumor cells to alkylating agents. It is a predictive biomarker in high-grade gliomas treated with temozolomide, however, there is no consensus on which test method, methylation sites, and cutoff values to use. METHODS: We performed a Cochrane Review to examine studies using different techniques to measure MGMT and predict survival in glioblastoma patients treated with temozolomide. Eligible longitudinal studies included (i) adults with glioblastoma treated with temozolomide with or without radiotherapy, or surgery; (ii) where MGMT status was determined in tumor tissue, and assessed by 1 or more technique; and (iii) where overall survival was an outcome parameter, with sufficient information to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). Two or more methods were compared in 32 independent cohorts with 3474 patients. RESULTS: Methylation-specific PCR (MSP) and pyrosequencing (PSQ) techniques were more prognostic than immunohistochemistry for MGMT protein, and PSQ is a slightly better predictor than MSP. CONCLUSIONS: We cannot draw strong conclusions about use of frozen tissue vs formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded in MSP and PSQ. Also, our meta-analysis does not provide strong evidence about the best CpG sites or threshold. MSP has been studied mainly for CpG sites 76-80 and 84-87 and PSQ at CpG sites ranging from 72 to 95. A cutoff threshold of 9% for CpG sites 74-78 performed better than higher thresholds of 28% or 29% in 2 of the 3 good-quality studies. About 190 studies were identified presenting HRs from survival analysis in patients in which MGMT methylation was measured by 1 technique only.

Prognostic value of test(s) for O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation for predicting overall survival in people with glioblastoma treated with temozolomide.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma is an aggressive form of brain cancer. Approximately five in 100 people with glioblastoma survive for five years past diagnosis. Glioblastomas that have a particular modification to their DNA (called methylation) in a particular region (the O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter) respond better to treatment with chemotherapy using a drug called temozolomide. OBJECTIVES: To determine which method for assessing MGMT methylation status best predicts overall survival in people diagnosed with glioblastoma who are treated with temozolomide. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index to December 2018, and examined reference lists. For economic evaluation studies, we additionally searched NHS Economic Evaluation Database (EED) up to December 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible studies were longitudinal (cohort) studies of adults with diagnosed glioblastoma treated with temozolomide with/without radiotherapy/surgery. Studies had to have related MGMT status in tumour tissue (assessed by one or more method) with overall survival and presented results as hazard ratios or with sufficient information (e.g. Kaplan-Meier curves) for us to estimate hazard ratios. We focused mainly on studies comparing two or more methods, and listed brief details of articles that examined a single method of measuring MGMT promoter methylation. We also sought economic evaluations conducted alongside trials, modelling studies and cost analysis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently undertook all steps of the identification and data extraction process for multiple-method studies. We assessed risk of bias and applicability using our own modified and extended version of the QUality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. We compared different techniques, exact promoter regions (5'-cytosine-phosphate-guanine-3' (CpG) sites) and thresholds for interpretation within studies by examining hazard ratios. We performed meta-analyses for comparisons of the three most commonly examined methods (immunohistochemistry (IHC), methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction (MSP) and pyrosequencing (PSQ)), with ratios of hazard ratios (RHR), using an imputed value of the correlation between results based on the same individuals. MAIN RESULTS: We included 32 independent cohorts involving 3474 people that compared two or more methods. We found evidence that MSP (CpG sites 76 to 80 and 84 to 87) is more prognostic than IHC for MGMT protein at varying thresholds (RHR 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.71). We also found evidence that PSQ is more prognostic than IHC for MGMT protein at various thresholds (RHR 1.36, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.84). The data suggest that PSQ (mainly at CpG sites 74 to 78, using various thresholds) is slightly more prognostic than MSP at sites 76 to 80 and 84 to 87 (RHR 1.14, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.48). Many variants of PSQ have been compared, although we did not see any strong and consistent messages from the results. Targeting multiple CpG sites is likely to be more prognostic than targeting just one. In addition, we identified and summarised 190 articles describing a single method for measuring MGMT promoter methylation status. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: PSQ and MSP appear more prognostic for overall survival than IHC. Strong evidence is not available to draw conclusions with confidence about the best CpG sites or thresholds for quantitative methods. MSP has been studied mainly for CpG sites 76 to 80 and 84 to 87 and PSQ at CpG sites ranging from 72 to 95. A threshold of 9% for CpG sites 74 to 78 performed better than higher thresholds of 28% or 29% in two of three good-quality studies making such comparisons.

Mutations in the histone methyltransferase gene KMT2B cause complex early-onset dystonia.

Histone lysine methylation, mediated by mixed-lineage leukemia (MLL) proteins, is now known to be critical in the regulation of gene expression, genomic stability, cell cycle and nuclear architecture. Despite MLL proteins being postulated as essential for normal development, little is known about the specific functions of the different MLL lysine methyltransferases. Here we report heterozygous variants in the gene KMT2B (also known as MLL4) in 27 unrelated individuals with a complex progressive childhood-onset dystonia, often associated with a typical facial appearance and characteristic brain magnetic resonance imaging findings. Over time, the majority of affected individuals developed prominent cervical, cranial and laryngeal dystonia. Marked clinical benefit, including the restoration of independent ambulation in some cases, was observed following deep brain stimulation (DBS). These findings highlight a clinically recognizable and potentially treatable form of genetic dystonia, demonstrating the crucial role of KMT2B in the physiological control of voluntary movement.

EBF1-PDGFRB fusion in pediatric B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (BCP-ALL): genetic profile and clinical implications.

The EBF1-PDGFRB gene fusion accounts for <1% of B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) cases and occurs within the Philadelphia-like ALL subtype. We report 15 EBF1-PDGFRB-positive patients from childhood ALL treatment trials (ALL 97/99, UKALL 2003, UKALL 2011) in the United Kingdom. The fusion arose from interstitial deletion of 5q33 (n = 11), balanced rearrangement (n = 2), or complex rearrangement (n = 2). There was a predominance of females (n = 11), median age of 12 years, and median white blood cell count of 48.8 × 10(9)/L. Among 12 patients who achieved complete remission on earlier trials (ALL 97/99 and UKALL 2003), 10 were positive for minimal residual disease (MRD) at the end of induction, and 7 relapsed 18 to 59 months after diagnosis. The majority (9 of 12) remained alive 6 to 9 years after diagnosis. There are reports of EBF1-PDGFRB-positive patients who are refractory to conventional chemotherapy who achieve complete response when treated with the tyrosine kinase inhibitor imatinib. These findings have prompted screening for EBF1-PDGFRB in patients entered onto the current UKALL 2011 trial for whom induction therapy failed, who did not achieve remission by day 29, or who remained MRD positive (>0.5%) at week 14. Two UKALL 2011 patients, positive for EBF1-PDGFRB, received imatinib; 1 died 6 months after a matched unrelated bone marrow transplant as a result of undefined encephalopathy, and the other remained in remission 10 months after diagnosis.

BRAF Fusion Analysis in Pilocytic Astrocytomas: KIAA1549-BRAF 15-9 Fusions Are More Frequent in the Midline Than Within the Cerebellum.

Pilocytic astrocytomas (PAs) are increasingly tested for KIAA1549-BRAF fusions. We used reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for the 3 most common KIAA1549-BRAF fusions, together with BRAF V600E and histone H3.3 K27M analyses to identify relationships of these molecular characteristics with clinical features in a cohort of 32 PA patients. In this group, the overall BRAF fusion detection rate was 24 (75%). Ten (42%) of the 24 had the 16-9 fusion, 8 (33%) had only the 15-9 fusion, and 1 (4%) of the patients had only the 16-11 fusion. In the PAs with only the 15-9 fusion, 1 PA was in the cerebellum and 7 were centered in the midline outside of the cerebellum, that is, in the hypothalamus (n = 4), optic pathways (n = 2), and brainstem (n = 1). Tumors within the cerebellum were negatively associated with fusion 15-9. Seven (22%) of the 32 patients had tumor-related deaths and 25 of the patients (78%) were alive between 2 and 14 years after initial biopsy. Age, sex, tumor location, 16-9 fusion, and 15-9 fusion were not associated with overall survival. Thus, in this small cohort, 15-9 KIAA1549-BRAF fusion was associated with midline PAs located outside of the cerebellum; these tumors, which are generally difficult to resect, are prone to recurrence.

EGFR and EGFRvIII analysis in glioblastoma as therapeutic biomarkers.

INTRODUCTION: EGFR and EGFRvIII analysis is of current interest because of new EGFRvIII vaccine trials opened in the UK. EGFR activation promotes cellular proliferation via activation of MAPK and PI3K-Akt pathways. EGFRvIII is the most common variant resulting from an in-frame deletion of 801bp, leading to constitutively active EGFR. METHOD: 51 glioblastoma samples from a cohort of 50 patients were tested for EGFR amplification by FISH and immunohistochemistry and EGFRvIII expression by reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR), and immunohistochemistry. EGFR and EGFRvIII expression was compared with Overall Survival in the cohort. RESULTS: Overall 22/51 samples (43%) were positive for EGFR, 16/51 (31%) were positive for EGFRvIII and 13/51 (25%) were positive for both. 9/51 cases (18%) were positive for EGFR alone, and 3/51 (6%) were positive for EGFRvIII alone. Of the EGFR positive cases, 22/51 (43%) were positive by FISH, 24/51 (47%) were positive by IHC and 2/51 (4%) were discrepant between methods (positive by IHC but non-amplified by FISH). Of the EGFRvIII positive cases, 16/51 (31%) were positive by RT-PCR, 17/51 (33%) were positive by IHC and 1/51 (2%) sample was discrepant (positive by IHC but not by RT-PCR). Neither EGFRvIII or EGFR are predictive of overall survival in this cohort. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, 25/51 (49%) of GBM showed EGFR alterations, including 16/51 (31%) with EGFRvIII. There was high concordance between IHC and FISH (96%) and IHC and RT-PCR (98%) as diagnostic methods. Neither EGFR or EGFRvIII is predictive of overall survival in this cohort. These results are key for selecting patients for novel individualised anti-EGFR therapies.

Next generation sequencing of chromosomal rearrangements in patients with split-hand/split-foot malformation provides evidence for DYNC1I1 exonic enhancers of DLX5/6 expression in humans.

OBJECTIVE: Split-hand/foot malformation type 1 is an autosomal dominant condition with reduced penetrance and variable expression. We report three individuals from two families with split-hand/split-foot malformation (SHFM) in whom next generation sequencing was performed to investigate the cause of their phenotype. METHODS AND RESULTS: The first proband has a de novo balanced translocation t(2;7)(p25.1;q22) identified by karyotyping. Whole genome sequencing showed that the chromosome 7 breakpoint is situated within the SHFM1 locus on chromosome 7q21.3. This separates the DYNC1I1 exons recently identified as limb enhancers in mouse studies from their target genes, DLX5 and DLX6. In the second family, X-linked recessive inheritance was suspected and exome sequencing was performed to search for a mutation in the affected proband and his uncle. No coding mutation was found within the SHFM2 locus at Xq26 or elsewhere in the exome, but a 106 kb deletion within the SHFM1 locus was detected through copy number analysis. Genome sequencing of the deletion breakpoints showed that the DLX5 and DLX6 genes are disomic but the putative DYNC1I1 exon 15 and 17 enhancers are deleted. CONCLUSIONS: Exome sequencing identified a 106 kb deletion that narrows the SHFM1 critical region from 0.9 to 0.1 Mb and confirms a key role of DYNC1I1 exonic enhancers in normal limb formation in humans.