When is a mutation not a mutation: the case of the c.594-2A>C splice variant in a woman harbouring another BRCA1 mutation in trans.

Since the identification of BRCA1 there has only ever been described two bi-allelic mutation carriers, one of whom was subsequently shown to be a mono-allelic carrier. The second patient diagnosed with two BRCA1 mutations appears to be accurate but there remain some questions about the missense variant identified in that patient. In this report we have identified a woman who is a bi-allelic mutation carrier of BRCA1 and provide an explanation as to why this patient has a phenotype very similar to that of any mono-allelic mutation carrier. The splice variant identified in this patient appears to be associated with the up-regulation of a BRCA1 splice variant that rescues the lethality of being a double mutant. The consequences of the findings of this report may have implications for mutation interpretation and that could serve as a model for not only BRCA1 but also for other autosomal dominant disorders that are considered as being embryonically lethal.

Lessons learnt from implementation of a Lynch syndrome screening program for patients with gynaecological malignancy.

Despite a trend towards universal testing, best practice to screen patients presenting with gynaecological malignancy for Lynch syndrome (LS) is uncertain. We report our institutional experience of a co-ordinated gynaecological LS screening program. All patients with endometrial carcinoma or carcinosarcoma, or gynaecological endometrioid or clear cell carcinomas undergo reflex four panel immunohistochemistry (IHC) for MLH1, PMS2, MSH2 and MSH6 followed by cascade somatic hypermethylation analysis of the MLH1 promoter locus for dual MLH1/PMS2 negative tumours. On the basis of these results, genetic counselling and targeted germline mutation testing is then offered to patients considered at high risk of LS. From 1 August 2013 to 31 December 2015, 124 patients were screened (mean age 64.6 years). Thirty-six (29.0%) demonstrated abnormal MMR IHC: 26 (72.2%) showed dual loss of MLH1/PMS2, five (13.9%) dual loss of MSH2/MSH6, three (8.3%) isolated loss of MSH6, and two (5.6%) isolated loss of PMS2. Twenty-five of 26 (96.1%) patients with dual MLH1/PMS2 loss demonstrated MLH1 promoter methylation. Therefore, 11 (8.9%) patients screened were classified as high risk for LS, of whom nine (81.8%) accepted germline mutation testing. Three (2.4% of total screened) were confirmed to have LS, two with germline PMS2 and one with germline MSH2 mutation. Massive parallel sequencing of tumour tissue demonstrated somatic mutations which were concordant with the IHC results in the remainder. Interestingly, the one MLH1/PMS2 IHC negative but not hypermethylated tumour harboured only somatic MLH1 mutations, indicating that universal cascade methylation testing in MLH1/PMS2 IHC negative tumours is very low yield and could be reconsidered in a resource-poor setting. In conclusion, universal screening for LS in patients presenting with gynaecological malignancy using the algorithm described above identified LS in three of 124 (2.4%) of our population. Only three of nine (33.3%) patients considered at high risk for LS by combined IHC and hypermethylation analysis were proven to have LS. Only one of the LS patients was less than 50 years of age and none of these patients would have been identified had more restrictive Amsterdam or Bethesda criteria been applied.

Blood-based detection of RAS mutations to guide anti-EGFR therapy in colorectal cancer patients: concordance of results from circulating tumor DNA and tissue-based RAS testing.

An accurate blood-based RAS mutation assay to determine eligibility of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients for anti-EGFR therapy would benefit clinical practice by better informing decisions to administer treatment independent of tissue availability. The objective of this study was to determine the level of concordance between plasma and tissue RAS mutation status in patients with mCRC to gauge whether blood-based RAS mutation testing is a viable alternative to standard-of-care RAS tumor testing. RAS testing was performed on plasma samples from newly diagnosed metastatic patients, or from recurrent mCRC patients using the highly sensitive digital PCR technology, BEAMing (beads, emulsions, amplification, and magnetics), and compared with DNA sequencing data of respective FFPE (formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded) tumor samples. Discordant tissue RAS results were re-examined by BEAMing, if possible. The prevalence of RAS mutations detected in plasma (51%) vs. tumor (53%) was similar, in accord with the known prevalence of RAS mutations observed in mCRC patient populations. The positive agreement between plasma and tumor RAS results was 90.4% (47/52), the negative agreement was 93.5% (43/46), and the overall agreement (concordance) was 91.8% (90/98). The high concordance of plasma and tissue results demonstrates that blood-based RAS mutation testing is a viable alternative to tissue-based RAS testing.

A longitudinal evaluation of performance of automated BCR-ABL1 quantitation using cartridge-based detection system.

An automated cartridge-based detection system (GeneXpert; Cepheid) is being widely adopted in low throughput laboratories for monitoring BCR-ABL1 transcript in chronic myelogenous leukaemia. This Australian study evaluated the longitudinal performance specific characteristics of the automated system.The automated cartridge-based system was compared prospectively with the manual qRT-PCR-based reference method at SA Pathology, Adelaide, over a period of 2.5 years. A conversion factor determination was followed by four re-validations. Peripheral blood samples (n = 129) with international scale (IS) values within detectable range were selected for assessment. The mean bias, proportion of results within specified fold difference (2-, 3- and 5-fold), the concordance rate of major molecular remission (MMR) and concordance across a range of IS values on paired samples were evaluated.The initial conversion factor for the automated system was determined as 0.43. Except for the second re-validation, where a negative bias of 1.9-fold was detected, all other biases fell within desirable limits. A cartridge-specific conversion factor and efficiency value was introduced and the conversion factor was confirmed to be stable in subsequent re-validation cycles. Concordance with the reference method/laboratory at >0.1-≤10 IS was 78.2% and at ≤0.001 was 80%, compared to 86.8% in the >0.01-≤0.1 IS range. The overall and MMR concordance were 85.7% and 94% respectively, for samples that fell within ±â€Š5-fold of the reference laboratory value over the entire period of study.Conversion factor and performance specific characteristics for the automated system were longitudinally stable in the clinically relevant range, following introduction by the manufacturer of lot specific efficiency values.