The role of family history in predicting germline pathogenic variant carriers who develop pancreatic cancer: Results of a multicenter collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) surveillance is recommended for some individuals with a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant (PV/LPV) in a PDAC susceptibility gene; the recommendation is often dependent on family history of PDAC. This study aimed to describe PDAC family history in individuals with PDAC who underwent genetic testing to determine the appropriateness of including a family history requirement in these recommendations. METHODS: Individuals with PDAC with a germline heterozygous PV/LPV in ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, EPCAM, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PALB2, or PMS2 (PV/LPV carriers) were assessed for family history of PDAC in first-degree relatives (FDRs) or second-degree relatives (SDRs) from nine institutions. A control group of individuals with PDAC without a germline PV/LPV was also assessed. RESULTS: The study included 196 PV/LPV carriers and 1184 controls. In the PV/LPV carriers, 25.5% had an affected FDR and/or SDR compared to 16.9% in the control group (p = .004). PV/LPV carriers were more likely to have an affected FDR compared to the controls (p = .003) but there was no statistical difference when assessing only affected SDRs (p = .344). CONCLUSIONS: Most PV/LPV carriers who developed PDAC did not have a close family history of PDAC and would not have met most current professional societies' recommendations for consideration of PDAC surveillance before diagnosis. However, PV/LPV carriers were significantly more likely to have a family history of PDAC, particularly an affected FDR. These findings support family history as a risk modifier in PV/LPV carriers, and highlight the need to identify other risk factors.

The Evolution of Genetic Testing from Focused Testing to Panel Testing and from Patient Focused to Population Testing: Are We There Yet?

The field of cancer genetics has evolved significantly over the past 30 years. Genetic testing has become less expensive and more comprehensive which has changed practice patterns. It is no longer necessary to restrict testing to those with the highest likelihood of testing positive. In addition, we have learned that the criteria developed to determine who has the highest likelihood of testing positive are neither sensitive nor specific. As a result, the field is moving from testing only the highest risk patients identified based on testing criteria to testing all cancer patients. This requires new service delivery models where testing can be mainstreamed into oncology clinics and posttest genetic counseling can be provided to individuals who test positive and those with concerning personal or family histories who test negative. The use of videos, testing kiosks, chatbots, and genetic counseling assistants have been employed to help facilitate testing at a larger scale and have good patient uptake and satisfaction. While testing is important for cancer patients as it may impact their treatment, future cancer risks, and family member's cancer risks, it is unfortunate that their cancer could not be prevented in the first place. Population testing for all adults would be a strategy to identify individuals with adult-onset diseases before they develop cancer in an attempt to prevent it entirely. A few research studies (Healthy Nevada and MyCode) have offered population testing for the three Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tier 1 conditions: hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome, Lynch syndrome, and familial hypercholesterolemia finding a prevalence of 1 in 70 individuals in the general population. We anticipate that testing for all cancer patients and the general population will continue to increase over the next 20 years and the genetics community needs to help lead the way to ensure this happens in a responsible manner.

Turning the Page on Breast Cancer in Ohio: Lessons learned from implementing a multilevel intervention to reduce breast cancer mortality among Black women.

BACKGROUND: Turning the Page on Breast Cancer (TPBC) uses a multilevel approach to reduce breast cancer (BC) mortality among Black women. TPBC intervenes by (1) improving health care facilities' ability to conduct effective BC screening, follow-up, and treatment; (2) involving community-based organizations; and (3) providing education and personal risk information through a culturally relevant website. Ohio has among the worst BC mortality rates in the United States for Black women. TPBC is in its third year of providing targeted interventions in 12 Ohio counties with particularly high BC rates among Black women. METHODS: TPBC enrolls health care facilities, collects organizational and patient data, and conducts key informant interviews to inform the provision of appropriate evidence-based interventions. TPBC engages Black communities through community-based organizations and social media advertising. The TPBC website offers BC information, connects Black women to community BC resources, and provides access to a risk-assessment tool. RESULTS: TPBC has provided tailored information packets, evidence-based interventions, and systematic support for improving the tracking and follow-up of breast health care among patients in 10 clinical partnerships. The project has provided education at community events monthly since mid-2021. The TPBC website (http://endbreastcancerohio.org) is promoted through social media (primarily Facebook) and community events to reach Black women aged 25-70 years. To date, 4108 unique users have visited the website, of whom 15.9% completed the risk assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Novel strategies are needed to address persistent disparities in BC outcomes among Black women. TPBC demonstrates the potential effectiveness of multiple methods of community-based, clinic-based, and web-based engagement. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Turning the Page on Breast Cancer (TPBC) aims to reduce breast cancer mortality among Black women in Ohio by conducting multilevel, community-engaged interventions in 12 counties. Women are provided risk information and education at virtual and in-person community events and through a community-friendly website that was launched in November 2020. Almost 4000 women have visited the website, which offers community-targeted information, urges screening for individuals at elevated risk, and offers access to patient navigation services; 655 users have used a breast cancer risk-assessment tool on the site. Community-based organizations conduct educational efforts. TPBC partners with health care facilities, which are taught to improve their ability to conduct effective breast cancer screening, follow-up, and treatment. So far, TPBC has provided educational information, evidence-based intervention lists, tailored information packets, and ongoing quarterly support to partners in 10 counties. Evaluation will focus on aggregated data for screening and genetic testing referral at the clinic level.

Genome-wide Modeling of Polygenic Risk Score in Colorectal Cancer Risk.

Accurate colorectal cancer (CRC) risk prediction models are critical for identifying individuals at low and high risk of developing CRC, as they can then be offered targeted screening and interventions to address their risks of developing disease (if they are in a high-risk group) and avoid unnecessary screening and interventions (if they are in a low-risk group). As it is likely that thousands of genetic variants contribute to CRC risk, it is clinically important to investigate whether these genetic variants can be used jointly for CRC risk prediction. In this paper, we derived and compared different approaches to generating predictive polygenic risk scores (PRS) from genome-wide association studies (GWASs) including 55,105 CRC-affected case subjects and 65,079 control subjects of European ancestry. We built the PRS in three ways, using (1) 140 previously identified and validated CRC loci; (2) SNP selection based on linkage disequilibrium (LD) clumping followed by machine-learning approaches; and (3) LDpred, a Bayesian approach for genome-wide risk prediction. We tested the PRS in an independent cohort of 101,987 individuals with 1,699 CRC-affected case subjects. The discriminatory accuracy, calculated by the age- and sex-adjusted area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC), was highest for the LDpred-derived PRS (AUC = 0.654) including nearly 1.2 M genetic variants (the proportion of causal genetic variants for CRC assumed to be 0.003), whereas the PRS of the 140 known variants identified from GWASs had the lowest AUC (AUC = 0.629). Based on the LDpred-derived PRS, we are able to identify 30% of individuals without a family history as having risk for CRC similar to those with a family history of CRC, whereas the PRS based on known GWAS variants identified only top 10% as having a similar relative risk. About 90% of these individuals have no family history and would have been considered average risk under current screening guidelines, but might benefit from earlier screening. The developed PRS offers a way for risk-stratified CRC screening and other targeted interventions.

Prevalence and Predictors of Young-Onset Colorectal Neoplasia: Insights From a Nationally Representative Colonoscopy Registry.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: A disturbing increase in early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) has prompted recent guidelines to recommend lowering the colorectal cancer (CRC) screening starting age from 50 to 45 years old for average-risk individuals. Little is known about the prevalence of colorectal neoplasia in individuals between 45 and 49 years old, or even younger, in the United States. We analyzed a large, nationally representative data set of almost 3 million outpatient colonoscopies to determine the prevalence of, and risk factors for, colorectal neoplasia among patients aged 18 to 54. METHODS: Findings from high-quality colonoscopies were analyzed from AMSURG ambulatory endoscopy centers (ASCs) that report their results in the GI Quality Improvement Consortium (GIQuIC) Registry. Logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for EOCRC. RESULTS: Increasing age, male sex, White race, family history of CRC, and examinations for bleeding or screening were all associated with higher odds of advanced premalignant lesions (APLs) and CRC. Among patients aged 45 to 49, 32% had any neoplasia, 7.5% had APLs, and 0.58% had CRC. Rates were almost as high in those aged 40 to 44. Family history of CRC portended neoplasia rates 5 years earlier. Rates of APLs were higher in American Indian/Alaskan Natives, but lower among Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics, compared with White counterparts. The prevalence of any neoplasia and APL gradually increased between 2014 and 2019, in all age groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide support for lowering the screening age to 45 for all average-risk individuals. Early messaging to patients and providers in the years leading up to age 45 is warranted, especially in those with a family history of CRC.

Delphi Initiative for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer (DIRECt) International Management Guidelines.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC) are managed according to guidelines that are not age-specific. A multidisciplinary international group (DIRECt), composed of 69 experts, was convened to develop the first evidence-based consensus recommendations for eoCRC. METHODS: After reviewing the published literature, a Delphi methodology was used to draft and respond to clinically relevant questions. Each statement underwent 3 rounds of voting and reached a consensus level of agreement of ≥80%. RESULTS: The DIRECt group produced 31 statements in 7 areas of interest: diagnosis, risk factors, genetics, pathology-oncology, endoscopy, therapy, and supportive care. There was strong consensus that all individuals younger than 50 should undergo CRC risk stratification and prompt symptom assessment. All newly diagnosed eoCRC patients should receive germline genetic testing, ideally before surgery. On the basis of current evidence, endoscopic, surgical, and oncologic treatment of eoCRC should not differ from later-onset CRC, except for individuals with pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants. The evidence on chemotherapy is not sufficient to recommend changes to established therapeutic protocols. Fertility preservation and sexual health are important to address in eoCRC survivors. The DIRECt group highlighted areas with knowledge gaps that should be prioritized in future research efforts, including age at first screening for the general population, use of fecal immunochemical tests, chemotherapy, endoscopic therapy, and post-treatment surveillance for eoCRC patients. CONCLUSIONS: The DIRECt group produced the first consensus recommendations on eoCRC. All statements should be considered together with the accompanying comments and literature reviews. We highlighted areas where research should be prioritized. These guidelines represent a useful tool for clinicians caring for patients with eoCRC.

MLH1-methylated endometrial cancer under 60 years of age as the "sentinel" cancer in female carriers of high-risk constitutional MLH1 epimutation.

OBJECTIVE: Universal screening of endometrial carcinoma (EC) for mismatch repair deficiency (MMRd) and Lynch syndrome uses presence of MLH1 methylation to omit common sporadic cases from follow-up germline testing. However, this overlooks rare cases with high-risk constitutional MLH1 methylation (epimutation), a poorly-recognized mechanism that predisposes to Lynch-type cancers with MLH1 methylation. We aimed to determine the role and frequency of constitutional MLH1 methylation among EC cases with MMRd, MLH1-methylated tumors. METHODS: We screened blood for constitutional MLH1 methylation using pyrosequencing and real-time methylation-specific PCR in patients with MMRd, MLH1-methylated EC ascertained from (i) cancer clinics (n = 4, <60 years), and (ii) two population-based cohorts; "Columbus-area" (n = 68, all ages) and "Ohio Colorectal Cancer Prevention Initiative (OCCPI)" (n = 24, <60 years). RESULTS: Constitutional MLH1 methylation was identified in three out of four patients diagnosed between 36 and 59 years from cancer clinics. Two had mono-/hemiallelic epimutation (∼50% alleles methylated). One with multiple primaries had low-level mosaicism in normal tissues and somatic "second-hits" affecting the unmethylated allele in all tumors, demonstrating causation. In the population-based cohorts, all 68 cases from the Columbus-area cohort were negative and low-level mosaic constitutional MLH1 methylation was identified in one patient aged 36 years out of 24 from the OCCPI cohort, representing one of six (∼17%) patients <50 years and one of 45 patients (∼2%) <60 years in the combined cohorts. EC was the first/dual-first cancer in three patients with underlying constitutional MLH1 methylation. CONCLUSIONS: A correct diagnosis at first presentation of cancer is important as it will significantly alter clinical management. Screening for constitutional MLH1 methylation is warranted in patients with early-onset EC or synchronous/metachronous tumors (any age) displaying MLH1 methylation.

Constitutional MLH1 Methylation Is a Major Contributor to Mismatch Repair-Deficient, MLH1-Methylated Colorectal Cancer in Patients Aged 55 Years and Younger.

BACKGROUND: Most mismatch repair-deficient (MMRd) colorectal cancer (CRC) cases arise sporadically, associated with somatic MLH1 methylation, whereas approximately 20% have germline mismatch repair pathogenic variants causing Lynch syndrome (LS). Universal screening of incident CRC uses presence of MLH1 methylation in MMRd tumors to exclude sporadic cases from germline testing for LS. However, this overlooks rare cases with constitutional MLH1 methylation (epimutation), a poorly recognized mechanism for LS. We aimed to assess the frequency and age distribution of constitutional MLH1 methylation among incident CRC cases with MMRd, MLH1-methylated tumors. METHODS: In retrospective population-based studies, we selected all CRC cases with MMRd, MLH1-methylated tumors, regardless of age, prior cancer, family history, or BRAF V600E status, from the Columbus-area HNPCC study (Columbus) and Ohio Colorectal Cancer Prevention Initiative (OCCPI) cohorts. Blood DNA was tested for constitutional MLH1 methylation by pyrosequencing and real-time methylation-specific PCR, then confirmed with bisulfite-sequencing. RESULTS: Results were achieved for 95 of 98 Columbus cases and all 281 OCCPI cases. Constitutional MLH1 methylation was identified in 4 of 95 (4%) Columbus cases, ages 34, 38, 52, and 74 years, and 4 of 281 (1.4%) OCCPI cases, ages 20, 34, 50, and 55 years, with 3 showing low-level mosaic methylation. Mosaicism in blood and normal colon, plus tumor loss of heterozygosity of the unmethylated allele, demonstrated causality in 1 case with sample availability. Age stratification showed high rates of constitutional MLH1 methylation among younger patients. In the Columbus and OCCPI cohorts, respectively, these rates were 67% (2 of 3) and 25% (2 of 8) of patients aged <50 years but with half of the cases missed, and 75% (3 of 4) and 23.5% (4 of 17) of patients aged ≤55 years with most cases detected. CONCLUSIONS: Although rare overall, a significant proportion of younger patients with MLH1-methylated CRC had underlying constitutional MLH1 methylation. Routine testing for this high-risk mechanism is warranted in patients aged ≤55 years for a timely and accurate molecular diagnosis that will significantly alter their clinical management while minimizing additional testing.

Diagnostic criteria for constitutional mismatch repair deficiency (CMMRD): recommendations from the international consensus working group.

BACKGROUND: Constitutional mismatch repair deficiency syndrome (CMMRD) is the most aggressive cancer predisposition syndrome associated with multiorgan cancers, often presenting in childhood. There is variability in age and presentation of cancers and benign manifestations mimicking neurofibromatosis type 1. Genetic testing may not be informative and is complicated by pseudogenes associated with the most commonly associated gene, PMS2. To date, no diagnostic criteria exist. Since surveillance and immune-based therapies are available, establishing a CMMRD diagnosis is key to improve survival. METHODS: In order to establish a robust diagnostic path, a multidisciplinary international working group, with representation from the two largest consortia (International Replication Repair Deficiency (IRRD) consortium and European Consortium Care for CMMRD (C4CMMRD)), was formed to establish diagnostic criteria based on expertise, literature review and consensus. RESULTS: The working group established seven diagnostic criteria for the diagnosis of CMMRD, including four definitive criteria (strong evidence) and three likely diagnostic criteria (moderate evidence). All criteria warrant CMMRD surveillance. The criteria incorporate germline mismatch repair results, ancillary tests and clinical manifestation to determine a diagnosis. Hallmark cancers for CMMRD were defined by the working group after extensive literature review and consultation with the IRRD and C4CMMRD consortia. CONCLUSIONS: This position paper summarises the evidence and rationale to provide specific guidelines for CMMRD diagnosis, which necessitates appropriate surveillance and treatment.

Genetically proxied therapeutic inhibition of antihypertensive drug targets and risk of common cancers: A mendelian randomization analysis.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies have reported conflicting findings on the potential adverse effects of long-term antihypertensive medication use on cancer risk. Naturally occurring variation in genes encoding antihypertensive drug targets can be used as proxies for these targets to examine the effect of their long-term therapeutic inhibition on disease outcomes. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a mendelian randomization analysis to examine the association between genetically proxied inhibition of 3 antihypertensive drug targets and risk of 4 common cancers (breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate). Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in ACE, ADRB1, and SLC12A3 associated (P < 5.0 × 10-8) with systolic blood pressure (SBP) in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) were used to proxy inhibition of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE), ß-1 adrenergic receptor (ADRB1), and sodium-chloride symporter (NCC), respectively. Summary genetic association estimates for these SNPs were obtained from GWAS consortia for the following cancers: breast (122,977 cases, 105,974 controls), colorectal (58,221 cases, 67,694 controls), lung (29,266 cases, 56,450 controls), and prostate (79,148 cases, 61,106 controls). Replication analyses were performed in the FinnGen consortium (1,573 colorectal cancer cases, 120,006 controls). Cancer GWAS and FinnGen consortia data were restricted to individuals of European ancestry. Inverse-variance weighted random-effects models were used to examine associations between genetically proxied inhibition of these drug targets and risk of cancer. Multivariable mendelian randomization and colocalization analyses were employed to examine robustness of findings to violations of mendelian randomization assumptions. Genetically proxied ACE inhibition equivalent to a 1-mm Hg reduction in SBP was associated with increased odds of colorectal cancer (odds ratio (OR) 1.13, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.22; P = 3.6 × 10-4). This finding was replicated in the FinnGen consortium (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.92; P = 0.035). There was little evidence of association of genetically proxied ACE inhibition with risk of breast cancer (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.02, P = 0.35), lung cancer (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.10; P = 0.93), or prostate cancer (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.13; P = 0.08). Genetically proxied inhibition of ADRB1 and NCC were not associated with risk of these cancers. The primary limitations of this analysis include the modest statistical power for analyses of drug targets in relation to some less common histological subtypes of cancers examined and the restriction of the majority of analyses to participants of European ancestry. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that genetically proxied long-term ACE inhibition was associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer, warranting comprehensive evaluation of the safety profiles of ACE inhibitors in clinical trials with adequate follow-up. There was little evidence to support associations across other drug target-cancer risk analyses, consistent with findings from short-term randomized controlled trials for these medications.

Identifying Novel Susceptibility Genes for Colorectal Cancer Risk From a Transcriptome-Wide Association Study of 125,478 Subjects.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Susceptibility genes and the underlying mechanisms for the majority of risk loci identified by genome-wide association studies (GWAS) for colorectal cancer (CRC) risk remain largely unknown. We conducted a transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) to identify putative susceptibility genes. METHODS: Gene-expression prediction models were built using transcriptome and genetic data from the 284 normal transverse colon tissues of European descendants from the Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx), and model performance was evaluated using data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (n = 355). We applied the gene-expression prediction models and GWAS data to evaluate associations of genetically predicted gene-expression with CRC risk in 58,131 CRC cases and 67,347 controls of European ancestry. Dual-luciferase reporter assays and knockdown experiments in CRC cells and tumor xenografts were conducted. RESULTS: We identified 25 genes associated with CRC risk at a Bonferroni-corrected threshold of P < 9.1 × 10-6, including genes in 4 novel loci, PYGL (14q22.1), RPL28 (19q13.42), CAPN12 (19q13.2), MYH7B (20q11.22), and MAP1L3CA (20q11.22). In 9 known GWAS-identified loci, we uncovered 9 genes that have not been reported previously, whereas 4 genes remained statistically significant after adjusting for the lead risk variant of the locus. Through colocalization analysis in GWAS loci, we additionally identified 12 putative susceptibility genes that were supported by TWAS analysis at P < .01. We showed that risk allele of the lead risk variant rs1741640 affected the promoter activity of CABLES2. Knockdown experiments confirmed that CABLES2 plays a vital role in colorectal carcinogenesis. CONCLUSIONS: Our study reveals new putative susceptibility genes and provides new insight into the biological mechanisms underlying CRC development.

Differences in somatic TP53 mutation type in breast tumors by race and receptor status.

PURPOSE: Somatic driver mutations in TP53 are associated with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and poorer outcomes. Breast cancers in women of African ancestry (AA) are more likely to be TNBC and have somatic TP53 mutations than cancers in non-Hispanic White (NHW) women. Missense driver mutations in TP53 have varied functional impact including loss-of-function (LOF) or gain-of-function (GOF) activity, and dominant negative (DNE) effects. We aimed to determine if there were differences in somatic TP53 mutation types by patient ancestry or TNBC status. METHODS: We identified breast cancer datasets with somatic TP53 mutation data, ancestry, age, and hormone receptor status. Mutations were classified for functional impact using published data and type of mutation. We assessed differences using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: From 96 breast cancer studies, we identified 2964 women with somatic TP53 mutations: 715 (24.1%) Asian, 258 (8.7%) AA, 1931 (65.2%) NHW, and 60 (2%) Latina. The distribution of TP53 mutation type was similar by ancestry. However, 35.8% of tumors from NHW individuals had GOF mutations compared to 29% from AA individuals (p = 0.04). Mutations with DNE activity were positively associated with TNBC (OR 1.37, p = 0.03) and estrogen receptor (ER) negative status (OR 1.38; p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Somatic TP53 mutation types did not differ by ancestry overall, but GOF mutations were more common in NHW women than AA women. ER-negative and TNBC tumors are less likely to have DNE+ TP53 mutations which could reflect biological processes. Larger cohorts and functional studies are needed to further elucidate these findings.

Implementing universal upfront multi-gene panel testing in endometrial cancer: From cost to practical considerations.

OBJECTIVES: The routine use of upfront universal germline genetic testing among patients with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer (EC) has been proposed to improve diagnosis of Lynch syndrome (LS) and discover pathogenic variants (PVs) in other cancer susceptibility genes. We propose an algorithm prioritizing upfront multi-gene panel testing (MGPT) for newly diagnosed EC patients. METHODS: A decision analysis compared the cost of the current algorithm of universal mismatch repair (MMR) immunohistochemistry (IHC) for all EC cases to a new MGPT algorithm that employs upfront MGPT for all EC cases and reserves MMR IHC for the recurrent setting. The increase in the number of LS diagnoses using upfront MGPT, and the number of patients with PVs in BRCA1 and BRCA2 are also estimated. RESULTS: The MGPT algorithm demonstrated a cost savings of $259 per patient. Assuming 66,950 new cases of EC per year, this would represent $17.1 M of cost savings per year. When applied to all new diagnoses of EC in one year, the MGPT algorithm identified 660 (1%) additional cases of LS that would have been missed with the current algorithm. An additional 660 (1%) EC patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 PVs would be diagnosed only through implementation of universal MGPT. CONCLUSIONS: The use of universal upfront MGPT is a practical consideration for patients with newly diagnosed EC for cost savings and improved diagnosis of highly penetrant cancer syndromes. Incorporation of germline genetic testing in the upfront setting represents an opportunity to improve access to genetic counseling and testing, and ultimately an avenue to achieve equity and improve the lives of our patients with EC and their families.

Risk assessment and genetic counseling for Lynch syndrome - Practice resource of the National Society of Genetic Counselors and the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer.

Identifying individuals who have Lynch syndrome involves a complex diagnostic workup that includes taking a detailed family history and a combination of various tests such as immunohistochemistry and/or molecular which may be germline and/or somatic. The National Society of Genetic Counselors and the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer have come together to publish this practice resource for the evaluation of Lynch syndrome. The purpose of this practice resource was to provide guidance and a testing algorithm for Lynch syndrome as well as recommendations on when to offer testing. This practice resource does not replace a consultation with a genetics professional. This practice resource includes explanations in support of this and a summary of background data. While this practice resource is not intended to serve as a review of Lynch syndrome, it includes a discussion of background information and cites a number of key publications which should be reviewed for a more in-depth understanding. This practice resource is intended for genetic counselors, geneticists, gastroenterologists, surgeons, medical oncologists, obstetricians and gynecologists, nurses, and other healthcare providers who evaluate patients for Lynch syndrome.

Genetic architectures of proximal and distal colorectal cancer are partly distinct.

OBJECTIVE: An understanding of the etiologic heterogeneity of colorectal cancer (CRC) is critical for improving precision prevention, including individualized screening recommendations and the discovery of novel drug targets and repurposable drug candidates for chemoprevention. Known differences in molecular characteristics and environmental risk factors among tumors arising in different locations of the colorectum suggest partly distinct mechanisms of carcinogenesis. The extent to which the contribution of inherited genetic risk factors for CRC differs by anatomical subsite of the primary tumor has not been examined. DESIGN: To identify new anatomical subsite-specific risk loci, we performed genome-wide association study (GWAS) meta-analyses including data of 48 214 CRC cases and 64 159 controls of European ancestry. We characterised effect heterogeneity at CRC risk loci using multinomial modelling. RESULTS: We identified 13 loci that reached genome-wide significance (p<5×10-8) and that were not reported by previous GWASs for overall CRC risk. Multiple lines of evidence support candidate genes at several of these loci. We detected substantial heterogeneity between anatomical subsites. Just over half (61) of 109 known and new risk variants showed no evidence for heterogeneity. In contrast, 22 variants showed association with distal CRC (including rectal cancer), but no evidence for association or an attenuated association with proximal CRC. For two loci, there was strong evidence for effects confined to proximal colon cancer. CONCLUSION: Genetic architectures of proximal and distal CRC are partly distinct. Studies of risk factors and mechanisms of carcinogenesis, and precision prevention strategies should take into consideration the anatomical subsite of the tumour.

Using Somatic Mutations from Tumors to Classify Variants in Mismatch Repair Genes.

Present guidelines for classification of constitutional variants do not incorporate inferences from mutations seen in tumors, even when these are associated with a specific molecular phenotype. When somatic mutations and constitutional mutations lead to the same molecular phenotype, as for the mismatch repair genes, information from somatic mutations may enable interpretation of previously unclassified variants. To test this idea, we first estimated likelihoods that somatic variants in MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 drive microsatellite instability and characteristic IHC staining patterns by calculating likelihoods of high versus low normalized variant read fractions of 153 mutations known to be pathogenic versus those of 760 intronic passenger mutations from 174 paired tumor-normal samples. Mutations that explained the tumor mismatch repair phenotype had likelihood ratio for high variant read fraction of 1.56 (95% CI 1.42-1.71) at sites with no loss of heterozygosity and of 26.5 (95% CI 13.2-53.0) at sites with loss of heterozygosity. Next, we applied these ratios to 165 missense, synonymous, and splice variants observed in tumors, combining in a Bayesian analysis the likelihood ratio corresponding with the adjusted variant read fraction with pretest probabilities derived from published analyses and public databases. We suggest classifications for 86 of 165 variants: 7 benign, 31 likely benign, 22 likely pathogenic, and 26 pathogenic. These results illustrate that for mismatch repair genes, characterization of tumor mutations permits tumor mutation data to inform constitutional variant classification. We suggest modifications to incorporate molecular phenotype in future variant classification guidelines.

Circulating Levels of Insulin-like Growth Factor 1 and Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein 3 Associate With Risk of Colorectal Cancer Based on Serologic and Mendelian Randomization Analyses.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Human studies examining associations between circulating levels of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1) and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 (IGFBP3) and colorectal cancer risk have reported inconsistent results. We conducted complementary serologic and Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses to determine whether alterations in circulating levels of IGF1 or IGFBP3 are associated with colorectal cancer development. METHODS: Serum levels of IGF1 were measured in blood samples collected from 397,380 participants from the UK Biobank, from 2006 through 2010. Incident cancer cases and cancer cases recorded first in death certificates were identified through linkage to national cancer and death registries. Complete follow-up was available through March 31, 2016. For the MR analyses, we identified genetic variants associated with circulating levels of IGF1 and IGFBP3. The association of these genetic variants with colorectal cancer was examined with 2-sample MR methods using genome-wide association study consortia data (52,865 cases with colorectal cancer and 46,287 individuals without [controls]) RESULTS: After a median follow-up period of 7.1 years, 2665 cases of colorectal cancer were recorded. In a multivariable-adjusted model, circulating level of IGF1 associated with colorectal cancer risk (hazard ratio per 1 standard deviation increment of IGF1, 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.17). Similar associations were found by sex, follow-up time, and tumor subsite. In the MR analyses, a 1 standard deviation increment in IGF1 level, predicted based on genetic factors, was associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer risk (odds ratio 1.08; 95% CI 1.03-1.12; P = 3.3 × 10-4). Level of IGFBP3, predicted based on genetic factors, was associated with colorectal cancer risk (odds ratio per 1 standard deviation increment, 1.12; 95% CI 1.06-1.18; P = 4.2 × 10-5). Colorectal cancer risk was associated with only 1 variant in the IGFBP3 gene region (rs11977526), which also associated with anthropometric traits and circulating level of IGF2. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of blood samples from almost 400,000 participants in the UK Biobank, we found an association between circulating level of IGF1 and colorectal cancer. Using genetic data from 52,865 cases with colorectal cancer and 46,287 controls, a higher level of IGF1, determined by genetic factors, was associated with colorectal cancer. Further studies are needed to determine how this signaling pathway might contribute to colorectal carcinogenesis.

Double somatic mismatch repair gene pathogenic variants as common as Lynch syndrome among endometrial cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: Lynch syndrome is the most common cause of inherited endometrial cancer, attributable to germline pathogenic variants (PV) in mismatch repair (MMR) genes. Tumor microsatellite instability (MSI-high) and MMR IHC abnormalities are characteristics of Lynch syndrome. Double somatic MMR gene PV also cause MSI-high endometrial cancers. The aim of this study was to determine the relative frequency of Lynch syndrome and double somatic MMR PV. METHODS: 341 endometrial cancer patients enrolled in the Ohio Colorectal Cancer Prevention Initiative at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center from 1/1/13-12/31/16. All tumors underwent immunohistochemical (IHC) staining for the four MMR proteins, MSI testing, and MLH1 methylation testing if the tumor was MMR-deficient (dMMR). Germline genetic testing for Lynch syndrome was undertaken for all cases with dMMR tumors lacking MLH1 methylation. Tumor sequencing followed if a germline MMR gene PV was not identified. RESULTS: Twenty-seven percent (91/341) of tumors were either MSI-high or had abnormal IHC indicating dMMR. As expected, most dMMR tumors had MLH1 methylation; (69, 75.8% of the dMMR cases; 20.2% of total). Among the 22 (6.5%) cases with dMMR not explained by methylation, 10 (2.9% of total) were found to have Lynch syndrome (6 MSH6, 3 MSH2, 1 PMS2). Double somatic MMR PV accounted for the remaining 12 dMMR cases (3.5% of total). CONCLUSIONS: Since double somatic MMR gene PV are as common as Lynch syndrome among endometrial cancer patients, paired tumor and germline testing for patients with non-methylated dMMR tumor may be the most efficient approach for LS screening.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Version 1.2021.

Identifying individuals with hereditary syndromes allows for timely cancer surveillance, opportunities for risk reduction, and syndrome-specific management. Establishing criteria for hereditary cancer risk assessment allows for the identification of individuals who are carriers of pathogenic genetic variants. The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provides recommendations for the assessment and management of patients at risk for or diagnosed with high-risk colorectal cancer syndromes. The NCCN Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal panel meets annually to evaluate and update their recommendations based on their clinical expertise and new scientific data. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP)/attenuated familial adenomatous polyposis (AFAP) syndrome and considerations for management of duodenal neoplasia.

Advanced adenomas may be a red flag for hereditary cancer syndromes.

BACKGROUND: 16-25% of colorectal cancers (CRCs) diagnosed under age 50 are associated with hereditary cancer syndromes. Advanced adenomas are considered precursors to CRC. Although polyp removal prevents cancer, polypectomy does not change underlying genetic risk. Patients with isolated advanced polyps do not currently qualify for genetic testing unless they have a personal or family history of cancer. AIM: Describe the prevalence of hereditary cancer syndromes among patients with advanced colorectal polyps. METHODS: We performed a single center retrospective review from 2015 to 2019 of patients who underwent germline genetic testing with indication for testing listed as colorectal polyp. We excluded patients with a personal history of CRC and those with ≥10 cumulative polyps. We collected patient demographics, polyp characteristics, family history data and genetic testing results from the medical record. Discrete variables were reported as frequency and percentages and continuous variables reported as mean with range. RESULTS: A total of 42 patients underwent genetic testing due to a personal history of advanced adenoma. 17% of patients met current genetic testing criteria. All patients underwent multi-gene panel testing. Two patients (4.8%) had a germline pathogenic mutation (one in MLH1 and one in CHEK2). The patient with an MLH1 mutation met current criteria for genetic testing (PREMM5 score 5.8), however the patient with the CHEK2 mutation did not. Both mutation carriers had a personal history of synchronous or metachronous advanced adenomas. 38% had a variant of uncertain significance. CONCLUSIONS: 5% of patients with advanced adenomas in our retrospective series had a pathogenic germline mutation in a cancer predisposition gene. Though the patient with a pathogenic mutation in MLH1 met current clinical criteria for genetic testing, this was not recognized prior to referral; he was referred based on a personal history of advanced adenoma. Advanced polyps may be a red flag to identify patients who are at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes.