PURPOSE: There is a paucity of data quantifying the familial risk of colorectal cancer associated with mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient and MMR-stable tumors. To address this, we analyzed a population-based series of 1,042 colorectal cancer probands with verified family histories. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Constitutional DNA from probands was systematically screened for MYH variants and those with cancers displaying microsatellite instability (MSI) for germ-line MMR mutations; diagnoses of familial adenomatous polyposis and juvenile polyposis were established based on clinical phenotype and mutational analysis. Familial colorectal cancer risks were enumerated from age-, sex-, and calendar-specific population incidence rates. Segregation analysis was conducted to derive a model of the residual familial aggregation of colorectal cancer. RESULTS: Germ-line predisposition to colorectal cancer was identified in 37 probands [3.4%; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 2.4-4.6]: 29 with MLH1/MSH2 mutations, 2 with familial adenomatous polyposis, 1 with juvenile polyposis, and 5 with biallelic MYH variants. The risk of colorectal cancer in first-degree relatives of probands with MSI and MMR-stable cancers was increased 5.01-fold (95% CI, 3.73-6.59) and 1.31-fold (95% CI, 1.07-1.59), respectively. MSH2/MLH1 mutations were responsible for 50% of the overall excess familial risk and 80% of the risk associated with MSI cancers but 32% of the familial risk was unaccounted for by known loci. Genetic models based on major gene loci did not provide a better explanation of the residual familial aggregation than a simple polygenic model. CONCLUSIONS: The information from our analyses should be useful in quantifying familial risks in clinical practice and in the design of studies to identify novel disease alleles.
PURPOSE: There is a paucity of data quantifying the familial risk of colorectal cancer associated with mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient and MMR-stable tumors. To address this, we analyzed a population-based series of 1,042 colorectal cancer probands with verified family histories. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Constitutional DNA from probands was systematically screened for MYH variants and those with cancers displaying microsatellite instability (MSI) for germ-line MMR mutations; diagnoses of familial adenomatous polyposis and juvenile polyposis were established based on clinical phenotype and mutational analysis. Familial colorectal cancer risks were enumerated from age-, sex-, and calendar-specific population incidence rates. Segregation analysis was conducted to derive a model of the residual familial aggregation of colorectal cancer. RESULTS: Germ-line predisposition to colorectal cancer was identified in 37 probands [3.4%; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 2.4-4.6]: 29 with MLH1/MSH2 mutations, 2 with familial adenomatous polyposis, 1 with juvenile polyposis, and 5 with biallelic MYH variants. The risk of colorectal cancer in first-degree relatives of probands with MSI and MMR-stable cancers was increased 5.01-fold (95% CI, 3.73-6.59) and 1.31-fold (95% CI, 1.07-1.59), respectively. MSH2/MLH1 mutations were responsible for 50% of the overall excess familial risk and 80% of the risk associated with MSI cancers but 32% of the familial risk was unaccounted for by known loci. Genetic models based on major gene loci did not provide a better explanation of the residual familial aggregation than a simple polygenic model. CONCLUSIONS: The information from our analyses should be useful in quantifying familial risks in clinical practice and in the design of studies to identify novel disease alleles.
Authors: A Joan Levine; Aung Ko Win; Daniel D Buchanan; Mark A Jenkins; John A Baron; Joanne P Young; Tiffany I Long; Daniel J Weisenberger; Peter W Laird; Rebecca L McCall; David J Duggan; Robert W Haile Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2011-12-05
Authors: Iina Niittymäki; Eevi Kaasinen; Sari Tuupanen; Auli Karhu; Heikki Järvinen; Jukka-Pekka Mecklin; Ian P M Tomlinson; Maria Chiara Di Bernardo; Richard S Houlston; Lauri A Aaltonen Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2010-05-25 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Emily Webb; Peter Broderick; Steven Lubbe; Ian Chandler; Ian Tomlinson; Richard S Houlston Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2009-05-27 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Joanne Young; Mark Jenkins; Susan Parry; Bruce Young; Derek Nancarrow; Dallas English; Graham Giles; Jeremy Jass Journal: Gut Date: 2007-06-12 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Steven J Hawken; Celia M T Greenwood; Thomas J Hudson; Rafal Kustra; John McLaughlin; Quanhe Yang; Brent W Zanke; Julian Little Journal: Hum Genet Date: 2010-05-01 Impact factor: 4.132
Authors: Alan M Pittman; Silvia Naranjo; Sanni E Jalava; Philip Twiss; Yussanne Ma; Bianca Olver; Amy Lloyd; Jayaram Vijayakrishnan; Mobshra Qureshi; Peter Broderick; Tom van Wezel; Hans Morreau; Sari Tuupanen; Lauri A Aaltonen; M Eva Alonso; Miguel Manzanares; Angela Gavilán; Tapio Visakorpi; José Luis Gómez-Skarmeta; Richard S Houlston Journal: PLoS Genet Date: 2010-09-16 Impact factor: 5.917
Authors: I P M Tomlinson; M Dunlop; H Campbell; B Zanke; S Gallinger; T Hudson; T Koessler; P D Pharoah; I Niittymäki; I Niittymäkix; S Tuupanen; S Tuupanenx; L A Aaltonen; K Hemminki; A Lindblom; A Försti; O Sieber; L Lipton; T van Wezel; H Morreau; J T Wijnen; P Devilee; K Matsuda; Y Nakamura; S Castellví-Bel; C Ruiz-Ponte; A Castells; A Carracedo; J W C Ho; P Sham; R M W Hofstra; P Vodicka; H Brenner; J Hampe; C Schafmayer; J Tepel; S Schreiber; H Völzke; M M Lerch; C A Schmidt; S Buch; V Moreno; C M Villanueva; P Peterlongo; P Radice; M M Echeverry; A Velez; L Carvajal-Carmona; R Scott; S Penegar; P Broderick; A Tenesa; R S Houlston Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2009-11-17 Impact factor: 7.640