Chromocolonoscopy detects more adenomas than white light colonoscopy or narrow band imaging colonoscopy in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer screening.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Individuals carrying germline mutations in one of the genes responsible for hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC) have a lifetime risk of up to 80 % of developing colorectal cancer. As there is evidence for a higher incidence of flat adenomatous precursors and because an accelerated adenoma-carcinoma sequence has been postulated for these patients, early detection of these lesions is essential. It was the aim of the present study to assess the detection rate of polypoid lesions by comparing chromocolonoscopy with standard white light colonoscopy and narrow-band imaging (NBI) colonoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 109 patients were included (98 with a functionally relevant mutation in a mismatch repair gene, 11 fulfilling the strict Amsterdam criteria). In 47 patients, standard colonoscopy was followed by chromocolonoscopy with indigo carmine. In 62 patients, NBI was performed first followed by chromocolonoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 128 hyperplastic and 52 adenomatous lesions were detected. In the first series, 0.5 lesions/patient were identified by standard colonoscopy and 1.5 lesions/patient by chromocolonoscopy ( P < 0.001). In the second series, 0.7 lesions/patient were detected by NBI colonoscopy and 1.8 lesions/patient by chromocolonoscopy ( P = 0.01). At least one adenoma was detected in 15 % of patients by both standard and NBI colonoscopy compared with 28 % of patients by chromocolonoscopy. CONCLUSION: According to this study, chromocolonoscopy detects significantly more hyperplastic and, in particular, adenomatous lesions than standard white light colonoscopy or NBI.

Recommendations to improve identification of hereditary and familial colorectal cancer in Europe.

Familial colorectal cancer (CRC) accounts for 10-15% of all CRCs. In about 5% of all cases, CRC is associated with a highly penetrant dominant inherited syndrome. The most common inherited form of non-polyposis CRC is the Lynch syndrome which is responsible for about 2-4% of all cases. Surveillance of individuals at high risk for CRC prevents the development of advanced CRC. About 1 million individuals in Western Europe are at risk for Lynch syndrome. We performed a survey to evaluate the strategies currently used to identify individuals at high risk for CRC in 14 Western European countries. Questionnaires were distributed amongst members of a European collaborative group of experts that aims to improve the prognosis of families with hereditary CRC. The survey showed that in all countries obtaining a family history followed by referral to clinical genetics centres of suspected cases was the main strategy to identify familial and hereditary CRC. In five out of seven countries with a (regional or national) CRC population screening program, attention was paid in the program to the detection of familial CRC. In only one country were special campaigns organized to increase the awareness of familial CRC among the general population. In almost all countries, the family history is assessed when a patient visits a general practitioner or hospital. However, the quality of family history taking was felt to be rather poor. Microsatellite instability testing (MSI) or immunohistochemical analysis (IHC) of CRC are usually recommended as tools to select high-risk patients for genetic testing and are performed in most countries in patients suspected of Lynch syndrome. In one country, IHC was recommended in all new cases of CRC. In most countries there are no specific programs on cancer genetics in the teaching curriculum for medical doctors. In conclusion, the outcome of this survey and the discussions within an European expert group may be used to improve the strategies to identify individuals at high risk of CRC. More attention should be given to increasing the awareness of the general population of hereditary CRC. Immunohistochemical analysis or MSI-analysis of all CRCs may be an effective tool for identifying all Lynch syndrome families. The cost-effectiveness of this approach should be further evaluated. All countries with a CRC population screening program should obtain a full family history as part of patient assessment.

Coexisting somatic promoter hypermethylation and pathogenic MLH1 germline mutation in Lynch syndrome.

Somatic epimutations in the MLH1 promoter mimic the phenotype of Lynch syndrome. To date, no somatic hypermethylation of the MLH1 promoter in the carrier of a pathogenic MLH1 germline mutation has been identified, prompting the recommendation that a germline mutation in MLH1 should only be sought in the absence of tumour tissue methylation. We aimed to determine whether methylation of the MLH1 promoter may coexist in carriers of a pathogenic germline mutation in MLH1. We examined the methylation status of the MLH1 promoter in 123 tumour tissue samples, demonstrating high microsatellite instability and loss of expression of a mismatch repair protein (60 cases with MLH1 germline mutation, 25 cases without mutation, 38 cases with MSH2 mutations), using combined bisulphite restriction analysis (COBRA) and SNaPshot analysis. Methylation of the MLH1 promoter was found in two patients with pathogenic germline mutations, one a carrier of a MLH1 mutation and the other a carrier of a MSH2 mutation. Our results demonstrate that methylation of the MLH1 promoter region does not exclude the presence of a germline mutation in a mismatch repair (MMR) gene. Hypermethylation of the MLH1 promoter may be present in most cases of sporadic colorectal cancers, but this does not exclude a diagnosis of Lynch syndrome.