MLH1 Promoter Methylation Could Be the Second Hit in Lynch Syndrome Carcinogenesis.

(1) Background: MLH1 hypermethylation is an epigenetic alteration in the tumorigenesis of colorectal cancer (CRC) and endometrial cancer (EC), causing gene silencing, and, as a consequence, microsatellite instability. Commonly, MLH1 hypermethylation is considered a somatic and sporadic event in cancer, and its detection is recognized as a useful tool to distinguish sporadic from inherited conditions (such as, Lynch syndrome (LS)). However, MLH1 hypermethylation has been described in rare cases of CRC and EC in LS patients. (2) Methods: A total of 61 cancers (31 CRCs, 27 ECs, 2 ovarian cancers, and 1 stomach cancer) from 56 patients referred to cancer genetic counselling were selected for loss of MLH1 protein expression and microsatellite instability. All cases were investigated for MLH1 promoter methylation and MLH1/PMS2 germline variants. (3) Results: Somatic MLH1 promoter hypermethylation was identified in 16.7% of CRC and in 40% of EC carriers of MLH1 germline pathogenic variants. In two families, primary and secondary MLH1 epimutations were demonstrated. (4) Conclusions: MLH1 hypermethylation should not be exclusively considered as a sporadic cancer mechanism, as a non-negligible number of LS-related cancers are MLH1 hypermethylated. Current flow charts for universal LS screening, which include MLH1 methylation, should be applied, paying attention to a patient's family and personal history.

Breast and Prostate Cancer Risks for Male BRCA1 and BRCA2 Pathogenic Variant Carriers Using Polygenic Risk Scores.

BACKGROUND: Recent population-based female breast cancer and prostate cancer polygenic risk scores (PRS) have been developed. We assessed the associations of these PRS with breast and prostate cancer risks for male BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. METHODS: 483 BRCA1 and 1318 BRCA2 European ancestry male carriers were available from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). A 147-single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) prostate cancer PRS (PRSPC) and a 313-SNP breast cancer PRS were evaluated. There were 3 versions of the breast cancer PRS, optimized to predict overall (PRSBC), estrogen receptor (ER)-negative (PRSER-), or ER-positive (PRSER+) breast cancer risk. RESULTS: PRSER+ yielded the strongest association with breast cancer risk. The odds ratios (ORs) per PRSER+ standard deviation estimates were 1.40 (95% confidence interval [CI] =1.07 to 1.83) for BRCA1 and 1.33 (95% CI = 1.16 to 1.52) for BRCA2 carriers. PRSPC was associated with prostate cancer risk for BRCA1 (OR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.28 to 2.33) and BRCA2 (OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.34 to 1.91) carriers. The estimated breast cancer odds ratios were larger after adjusting for female relative breast cancer family history. By age 85 years, for BRCA2 carriers, the breast cancer risk varied from 7.7% to 18.4% and prostate cancer risk from 34.1% to 87.6% between the 5th and 95th percentiles of the PRS distributions. CONCLUSIONS: Population-based prostate and female breast cancer PRS are associated with a wide range of absolute breast and prostate cancer risks for male BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. These findings warrant further investigation aimed at providing personalized cancer risks for male carriers and informing clinical management.

Filling the gap: A thorough investigation for the genetic diagnosis of unsolved polyposis patients with monoallelic MUTYH pathogenic variants.

BACKGROUNDS: MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP) is an autosomal recessive disease caused by biallelic pathogenic variants (PV) of the MUTYH gene. The aim of this study was to investigate the genetic causes of unexplained polyposis patients with monoallelic MUTYH PV. The analysis focused on 26 patients with suspected MAP, belonging to 23 families. Ten probands carried also one or more additional MUTYH variants of unknown significance. METHODS: Based on variant type and on the collected clinical and molecular data, these variants were reinterpreted by applying the ACMG/AMP rules. Moreover, supplementary analyses were carried out to investigate the presence of other variants and copy number variations in the coding and promoter regions of MUTYH, as well as other polyposis genes (APC, NTHL1, POLE, POLD1, MSH3, RNF43, and MCM9). RESULTS: We reclassified 4 out of 10 MUTYH variants as pathogenic or likely pathogenic, thus supporting the diagnosis of MAP in only four cases. Two other patients belonging to the same family showed a previously undetected deletion of the APC gene promoter. No PVs were found in the other investigated genes. However, 6 out of the 18 remaining families are still interesting MAP candidates, due to the co-presence of a class 3 MUTYH variant that could be reinterpreted in the next future. CONCLUSION: Several efforts are necessary to fully elucidate the genetic etiology of suspected MAP patients, especially those with the most severe polyposis/tumor phenotype. Clinical data, tumor molecular profile, family history, and polyposis inheritance mode may guide variant interpretation and address supplementary studies.

Lynch syndrome and Muir-Torre phenotype associated with a recurrent variant in the 3'UTR of the MSH6 gene.

A MSH6 3'UTR variant (c.*23_26dup) was found in 13 unrelated families consulted for Lynch/Muir-Torre Syndrome. This variant, which is very rare in the genomic databases, was absent in healthy controls and strongly segregated with the disease in the studied pedigrees. All tumors were defective for MSH2/MSH6/MSH3 proteins expression, but only MSH2 somatic pathogenic mutations were found in 5 of the 12 sequenced tumors. Moreover, we had no evidence of MSH6 transcript decrease in carriers, whereas MSH2 transcript was downregulated. Additional evaluations performed in representative carriers, including karyotype, arrayCGH and Linked-Reads whole genome sequencing, failed to evidence any MSH2 germline pathogenic variant. Posterior probability of pathogenicity for MSH6 c.*23_26dup was obtained from a multifactorial analysis incorporating segregation and phenotypic data and resulted >0.999, allowing to classify the variant as pathogenic (InSiGHT Class 5). Carriers shared a common haplotype involving MSH2/MSH6 loci, then a cryptic disease-associated variant, linked with MSH6 c.*23_26dup, cannot be completely excluded. Even if it is not clear whether the MSH6 variant is pathogenic per se or simply a marker of a disease-associated MSH2/MSH6 haplotype, all data collected on patients and pedigrees prompted us to manage the variant as pathogenic and to offer predictive testing within these families.

Large scale multifactorial likelihood quantitative analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants: An ENIGMA resource to support clinical variant classification.

The multifactorial likelihood analysis method has demonstrated utility for quantitative assessment of variant pathogenicity for multiple cancer syndrome genes. Independent data types currently incorporated in the model for assessing BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants include clinically calibrated prior probability of pathogenicity based on variant location and bioinformatic prediction of variant effect, co-segregation, family cancer history profile, co-occurrence with a pathogenic variant in the same gene, breast tumor pathology, and case-control information. Research and clinical data for multifactorial likelihood analysis were collated for 1,395 BRCA1/2 predominantly intronic and missense variants, enabling classification based on posterior probability of pathogenicity for 734 variants: 447 variants were classified as (likely) benign, and 94 as (likely) pathogenic; and 248 classifications were new or considerably altered relative to ClinVar submissions. Classifications were compared with information not yet included in the likelihood model, and evidence strengths aligned to those recommended for ACMG/AMP classification codes. Altered mRNA splicing or function relative to known nonpathogenic variant controls were moderately to strongly predictive of variant pathogenicity. Variant absence in population datasets provided supporting evidence for variant pathogenicity. These findings have direct relevance for BRCA1 and BRCA2 variant evaluation, and justify the need for gene-specific calibration of evidence types used for variant classification.

Toward a better definition of EPCAM deletions in Lynch Syndrome: Report of new variants in Italy and the associated molecular phenotype.

BACKGROUND: Inherited epimutations of Mismatch Repair (MMR) genes are responsible for Lynch Syndrome (LS) in a small, but well defined, subset of patients. Methylation of the MSH2 promoter consequent to the deletion of the upstream EPCAM gene is found in about 1%-3% of the LS patients and represents a classical secondary, constitutional and tissue-specific epimutation. Several different EPCAM deletions have been reported worldwide, for the most part representing private variants caused by an Alu-mediated recombination. METHODS: 712 patients with suspected LS were tested for MMR mutation in our Institute. EPCAM deletions were detected by multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) and then defined by Long-Range polymerase chain reaction (PCR)/Sanger sequencing. A comprehensive molecular characterization of colorectal cancer (CRC) tissues was carried out by immunohistochemistry of MMR proteins, Microsatellite Instability (MSI) assay, methylation specific MLPA and transcript analyses. In addition, somatic deletions and/or variants were investigated by MLPA and next generation sequencing (NGS). RESULTS: An EPCAM deletion was found in five unrelated probands in Italy: variants c.556-490_*8438del and c.858+1193_*5826del are novel; c.859-1430_*2033del and c.859-670_*530del were previously reported. All probands were affected by CRC at young age; tumors showed MSI and abnormal MSH2/MSH6 proteins expression. MSH2 promoter methylation, as well as aberrant in-frame or out-of-frame EPCAM/MSH2 fusion transcripts, were detected in CRCs and normal mucosae. CONCLUSION: An EPCAM deletion was the causative variant in about 2% of our institutional series of 224 LS patients, consistent with previously estimated frequencies. Early age and multiple CRCs was the main clinical feature of this subset of patients.

Somatic Testing on Gynecological Cancers Improve the Identification of Lynch Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Recent data from the literature indicate gynecological cancers (GCs) as sentinel cancers for a diagnosis of Lynch syndrome (LS). Clinical approaches to identifying LS have low sensitivity, whereas somatic tests on GCs may be a more sensitive and cost-effective strategy. METHODS: A series of 78 GCs belonging to 74 patients sent to the Genetic Counselling Service were investigated using microsatellite instability, immunohistochemical expression of mismatch repair (MMR) genes, and MLH1 promoter methylation. RESULTS: The presence of microsatellite instability was observed in 67.5% of GCs, and the absence of immunohistochemical expression of at least 1 of the 4 MMR proteins was observed in 71.4% of GCs, showing 96.1% concordance between the methods. Methylation analysis using methylation specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification performed on 35 samples revealed MLH1 promoter hypermethylation in 18 cases (54%). Molecular analysis identified 36 LS carriers of MMR variants (27 pathogenetic and 9 variants of uncertain significance), and, interestingly, 3 LS patients had MLH1 methylated GC.With regard to histological features, LS-related GCs included endocervical cancers and also histological types different from the endometrioid cancers. The presence of peritumoral lymphocytes in GCs was statistically associated with LS tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Somatic analysis is a useful strategy to distinguish sporadic from LS GC. Our data allow the identification of a subset of LS patients otherwise unrecognized on the basis of clinical or family history alone. In addition, our results indicate that some clinicopathological features including age of GC diagnosis; presence of peritumoral lymphocytes; isthmic, endocervical sites, and body mass index value could be useful criteria to select patients for genetic counseling.

Prediction of Breast and Prostate Cancer Risks in Male BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers Using Polygenic Risk Scores.

Purpose BRCA1/2 mutations increase the risk of breast and prostate cancer in men. Common genetic variants modify cancer risks for female carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations. We investigated-for the first time to our knowledge-associations of common genetic variants with breast and prostate cancer risks for male carriers of BRCA1/ 2 mutations and implications for cancer risk prediction. Materials and Methods We genotyped 1,802 male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 by using the custom Illumina OncoArray. We investigated the combined effects of established breast and prostate cancer susceptibility variants on cancer risks for male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations by constructing weighted polygenic risk scores (PRSs) using published effect estimates as weights. Results In male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations, PRS that was based on 88 female breast cancer susceptibility variants was associated with breast cancer risk (odds ratio per standard deviation of PRS, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.56; P = 8.6 × 10-6). Similarly, PRS that was based on 103 prostate cancer susceptibility variants was associated with prostate cancer risk (odds ratio per SD of PRS, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.35 to 1.81; P = 3.2 × 10-9). Large differences in absolute cancer risks were observed at the extremes of the PRS distribution. For example, prostate cancer risk by age 80 years at the 5th and 95th percentiles of the PRS varies from 7% to 26% for carriers of BRCA1 mutations and from 19% to 61% for carriers of BRCA2 mutations, respectively. Conclusion PRSs may provide informative cancer risk stratification for male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations that might enable these men and their physicians to make informed decisions on the type and timing of breast and prostate cancer risk management.

Tracking of the origin of recurrent mutations of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in the North-East of Italy and improved mutation analysis strategy.

BACKGROUND: About 20 % of hereditary breast cancers are caused by mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Since BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations may be spread throughout the gene, genetic testing is usually performed by direct sequencing of entire coding regions. In some populations, especially if relatively isolated, a few number of recurrent mutations is reported, sometimes caused by founder effect. METHODS: BRCA1 and BRCA2 screening for mutations was carried out on 1114 breast and/or ovarian cancer patients complying with the eligibility criteria for BRCA testing. Haplotype analysis was performed on the probands carrying recurrent mutations and their relatives, using two sets of microsatellite markers covering the BRCA1 (D17S588, D17S806, D17S902, D17S1325, D17S855, D17S1328, D17S800, and D17S250) and BRCA2 (D13S220, D13S267, D13S171, D13S1701, D13S1698, D13S260, D13S290, D13S1246) loci. The DMLE + 2.2 software was used to estimate the age of BRCA1 c.676delT and BRCA2 c.7806-2A > G. A multiplex PCR and two different primer extension assays were optimized and used for genotyping the recurrent mutations of the two genes. RESULTS: In the time frame of almost 20 years of genetic testing, we have found that five BRCA1 and three BRCA2 mutations are recurrent in a substantial subset of carriers from North-East Italy and neighboring Istria, where they represent more than 50 % of all mutations. Microsatellite analyses identified a common haplotype of different length for each mutation. Age estimation of BRCA1 c.676delT and BRCA2 c.7806-2A > G mutations revealed that they arose in the Friuli Venezia Giulia area about 86 and 94 generations ago, respectively. Suggestion of an association between BRCA2 c.7806-2A > G and risk of breast cancer in males has emerged. Finally, we developed a simple and efficient pre-screening test, performing an in-house primer extension SNaPshot® assay for the rapid identification of the eight recurrent mutations. CONCLUSIONS: Proofs of common ancestry has been obtained for the eight recurrent mutations. The observed genotype-phenotype correlation and the proposed rapid mutation detection strategy could improve the clinical management of breast and ovarian patients in North-East of Italy and neighboring geographic areas.

FANCM c.5791C>T nonsense mutation (rs144567652) induces exon skipping, affects DNA repair activity and is a familial breast cancer risk factor.

Numerous genetic factors that influence breast cancer risk are known. However, approximately two-thirds of the overall familial risk remain unexplained. To determine whether some of the missing heritability is due to rare variants conferring high to moderate risk, we tested for an association between the c.5791C>T nonsense mutation (p.Arg1931*; rs144567652) in exon 22 of FANCM gene and breast cancer. An analysis of genotyping data from 8635 familial breast cancer cases and 6625 controls from different countries yielded an association between the c.5791C>T mutation and breast cancer risk [odds ratio (OR) = 3.93 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.28-12.11; P = 0.017)]. Moreover, we performed two meta-analyses of studies from countries with carriers in both cases and controls and of all available data. These analyses showed breast cancer associations with OR = 3.67 (95% CI = 1.04-12.87; P = 0.043) and OR = 3.33 (95% CI = 1.09-13.62; P = 0.032), respectively. Based on information theory-based prediction, we established that the mutation caused an out-of-frame deletion of exon 22, due to the creation of a binding site for the pre-mRNA processing protein hnRNP A1. Furthermore, genetic complementation analyses showed that the mutation influenced the DNA repair activity of the FANCM protein. In summary, we provide evidence for the first time showing that the common p.Arg1931* loss-of-function variant in FANCM is a risk factor for familial breast cancer.

Concomitant mutation and epimutation of the MLH1 gene in a Lynch syndrome family.

Lynch syndrome (LS) is an inherited predisposition cancer syndrome, typically caused by germline mutations in the mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2. In the last years, a role for epimutations of the same genes has also been reported. MLH1 promoter methylation is a well known mechanism of somatic inactivation in tumors, and more recently, several cases of constitutional methylation have been identified. In four subjects affected by multiple tumors and belonging to a suspected LS family, we detected a novel secondary MLH1 gene epimutation. The methylation of MLH1 promoter was always linked in cis with a 997 bp-deletion (c.-168_c.116+713del), that removed exon 1 and partially involved the promoter of the same gene. Differently from cases with constitutional primary MLH1 inactivation, this secondary methylation was allele-specific and CpGs of the residual promoter region were totally methylated, leading to complete allele silencing. In the colon tumor of the proband, MLH1 and PMS2 expression was completely lost as a consequence of a pathogenic somatic point mutation (MLH1 c.199G>A, p.Gly67Arg) that also abrogated local methylation by destroying a CpG site. The evidences obtained highlight how MLH1 mutations and epimutations can reciprocally influence each other and suggest that an altered structure of the MLH1 locus results in epigenetic alteration.