OBJECTIVE: Lynch syndrome (LS) is characterized by a high lifetime incidence of colorectal cancer and gynecologic malignancies such as endometrial and ovarian cancer. Identification of LS families is important as it allows for heightened cancer screening which decreases colorectal cancer mortality. The original 1996 Bethesda guidelines included two gynecologic populations that should be further evaluated for LS: those with endometrial cancer before the age of 45 years and those with two LS-related cancers (i.e. synchronous endometrial and ovarian cancer). Our study aims to estimate the prevalence of LS in these two populations. METHODS: We utilized a diagnostic algorithm that included immunohistochemistry for mismatch repair protein expression followed by selective evaluation for microsatellite instability and MLH1 gene promoter methylation. RESULTS: Among 72 eligible patients, 9 (12%) had molecular findings consistent with LS: 6/50 (12%) in the early-onset endometrial cancer group and 3/22 (14%) in the synchronous primary cancer group. In an additional 3 cases, MLH1 silencing was due to promoter methylation: 1/50 (2%) in the early-onset endometrial cancer group and 2/22 (9%) in the synchronous primary cancer group. Of the 9 women with molecular criteria suggesting LS, only three had pedigrees meeting the Amsterdam criteria. CONCLUSIONS: A diagnostic algorithm can identify patients with LS and those who warrant further genetic testing. Our findings reinforce the recommendation that women diagnosed with endometrial cancer before the age of 45 years and women with synchronous endometrial and ovarian cancer be screened for LS, irrespective of family history.
OBJECTIVE:Lynch syndrome (LS) is characterized by a high lifetime incidence of colorectal cancer and gynecologic malignancies such as endometrial and ovarian cancer. Identification of LS families is important as it allows for heightened cancer screening which decreases colorectal cancer mortality. The original 1996 Bethesda guidelines included two gynecologic populations that should be further evaluated for LS: those with endometrial cancer before the age of 45 years and those with two LS-related cancers (i.e. synchronous endometrial and ovarian cancer). Our study aims to estimate the prevalence of LS in these two populations. METHODS: We utilized a diagnostic algorithm that included immunohistochemistry for mismatch repair protein expression followed by selective evaluation for microsatellite instability and MLH1 gene promoter methylation. RESULTS: Among 72 eligible patients, 9 (12%) had molecular findings consistent with LS: 6/50 (12%) in the early-onset endometrial cancer group and 3/22 (14%) in the synchronous primary cancer group. In an additional 3 cases, MLH1 silencing was due to promoter methylation: 1/50 (2%) in the early-onset endometrial cancer group and 2/22 (9%) in the synchronous primary cancer group. Of the 9 women with molecular criteria suggesting LS, only three had pedigrees meeting the Amsterdam criteria. CONCLUSIONS: A diagnostic algorithm can identify patients with LS and those who warrant further genetic testing. Our findings reinforce the recommendation that women diagnosed with endometrial cancer before the age of 45 years and women with synchronous endometrial and ovarian cancer be screened for LS, irrespective of family history.
Authors: Pamela T Soliman; Russell R Broaddus; Kathleen M Schmeler; Molly S Daniels; Delia Gonzalez; Brian M Slomovitz; David M Gershenson; Karen H Lu Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-12-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: R D Kolodner; J D Tytell; J L Schmeits; M F Kane; R D Gupta; J Weger; S Wahlberg; E A Fox; D Peel; A Ziogas; J E Garber; S Syngal; H Anton-Culver; F P Li Journal: Cancer Res Date: 1999-10-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Heather Hampel; Wendy Frankel; Jenny Panescu; Janet Lockman; Kaisa Sotamaa; Daniel Fix; Ilene Comeras; Jennifer La Jeunesse; Hidewaki Nakagawa; Judith A Westman; Thomas W Prior; Mark Clendenning; Pamela Penzone; Janet Lombardi; Patti Dunn; David E Cohn; Larry Copeland; Lynne Eaton; Jeffrey Fowler; George Lewandowski; Luis Vaccarello; Jeffrey Bell; Gary Reid; Albert de la Chapelle Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2006-08-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Heather Hampel; Wendy L Frankel; Edward Martin; Mark Arnold; Karamjit Khanduja; Philip Kuebler; Hidewaki Nakagawa; Kaisa Sotamaa; Thomas W Prior; Judith Westman; Jenny Panescu; Dan Fix; Janet Lockman; Ilene Comeras; Albert de la Chapelle Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-05-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Amy S Joehlin-Price; Carmen M Perrino; Julie Stephens; Floor J Backes; Paul J Goodfellow; David E Cohn; Adrian A Suarez Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2014-01-17 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Anne M Mills; Sofia Liou; James M Ford; Jonathan S Berek; Reetesh K Pai; Teri A Longacre Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 6.394