Literature DB >> 23888949

Utility of MLH1 methylation analysis in the clinical evaluation of Lynch Syndrome in women with endometrial cancer.

Amanda S Bruegl, Bojana Djordjevic, Diana L Urbauer, Shannon N Westin, Pamela T Soliman, Karen H Lu, Rajyalakshmi Luthra, Russell R Broaddus1.   

Abstract

Clinical screening criteria, such as young age of endometrial cancer diagnosis and family history of signature cancers, have traditionally been used to identify women with Lynch Syndrome, which is caused by mutation of a DNA mismatch repair gene. Immunohistochemistry and microsatellite instability analysis have evolved as important screening tools to evaluate endometrial cancer patients for Lynch Syndrome. A complicating factor is that 15-20% of sporadic endometrial cancers have immunohistochemical loss of the DNA mismatch repair protein MLH1 and high levels of microsatellite instability due to methylation of MLH1. The PCR-based MLH1 methylation assay potentially resolves this issue, yet many clinical laboratories do not perform this assay. The objective of this study was to determine if clinical and pathologic features help to distinguish sporadic endometrial carcinomas with MLH1 loss secondary to MLH1 methylation from Lynch Syndrome-associated endometrial carcinomas with MLH1 loss and absence of MLH1 methylation. Of 337 endometrial carcinomas examined, 54 had immunohistochemical loss of MLH1. 40/54 had MLH1 methylation and were designated as sporadic, while 14/54 lacked MLH1 methylation and were designated as Lynch Syndrome. Diabetes and deep myometrial invasion were associated with Lynch Syndrome; no other clinical or pathological variable distinguished the 2 groups. Combining Society of Gynecologic Oncology screening criteria with these 2 features accurately captured all Lynch Syndrome cases, but with low specificity. In summary, no single clinical/pathologic feature or screening criteria tool accurately identified all Lynch Syndrome-associated endometrial carcinomas, highlighting the importance of the MLH1 methylation assay in the clinical evaluation of these patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 23888949      PMCID: PMC3895501          DOI: 10.2174/13816128113199990538

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Pharm Des        ISSN: 1381-6128            Impact factor:   3.116


  40 in total

1.  Prospective evaluation of molecular screening for Lynch syndrome in patients with endometrial cancer ≤ 70 years.

Authors:  Celine H M Leenen; Margot G F van Lier; Helena C van Doorn; Monique E van Leerdam; Sjarlot G Kooi; Judith de Waard; Robert F Hoedemaeker; Ans M W van den Ouweland; Sanne M Hulspas; Hendrikus J Dubbink; Ernst J Kuipers; Anja Wagner; Winand N M Dinjens; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 5.482

2.  Gynecologic cancer as a "sentinel cancer" for women with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome.

Authors:  Karen H Lu; Mai Dinh; Wendy Kohlmann; Patrice Watson; Jane Green; Sapna Syngal; Prathap Bandipalliam; Lee-May Chen; Brian Allen; Peggy Conrad; Jonathan Terdiman; Charlotte Sun; Molly Daniels; Thomas Burke; David M Gershenson; Henry Lynch; Patrick Lynch; Russell R Broaddus
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  Testing women with endometrial cancer to detect Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Janice S Kwon; Jenna L Scott; C Blake Gilks; Molly S Daniels; Charlotte C Sun; Karen H Lu
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-05-02       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  MLH1 promoter methylation and gene silencing is the primary cause of microsatellite instability in sporadic endometrial cancers.

Authors:  S B Simpkins; T Bocker; E M Swisher; D G Mutch; D J Gersell; A J Kovatich; J P Palazzo; R Fishel; P J Goodfellow
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 6.150

5.  Prediction of germline mutations and cancer risk in the Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Sining Chen; Wenyi Wang; Shing Lee; Khedoudja Nafa; Johanna Lee; Kathy Romans; Patrice Watson; Stephen B Gruber; David Euhus; Kenneth W Kinzler; Jeremy Jass; Steven Gallinger; Noralane M Lindor; Graham Casey; Nathan Ellis; Francis M Giardiello; Kenneth Offit; Giovanni Parmigiani
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-09-27       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  BRAF mutation is frequently present in sporadic colorectal cancer with methylated hMLH1, but not in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Guoren Deng; Ian Bell; Suzanne Crawley; James Gum; Jonathan P Terdiman; Brian A Allen; Brindusa Truta; Marvin H Sleisenger; Young S Kim
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2004-01-01       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  Lynch syndrome screening strategies among newly diagnosed endometrial cancer patients.

Authors:  Kimberly Resnick; J Michael Straughn; Floor Backes; Heather Hampel; Kellie S Matthews; David E Cohn
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  The epidemiology of endometrial cancer in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer.

Authors:  H F Vasen; P Watson; J P Mecklin; J R Jass; J S Green; T Nomizu; H Müller; H T Lynch
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  1994 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.480

9.  MSI in endometrial carcinoma: absence of MLH1 promoter methylation is associated with increased familial risk for cancers.

Authors:  Alison J Whelan; Sheri Babb; David G Mutch; Janet Rader; Thomas J Herzog; Christina Todd; Jennifer L Ivanovich; Paul J Goodfellow
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2002-06-10       Impact factor: 7.396

10.  Molecular, pathologic, and clinical features of early-onset endometrial cancer: identifying presumptive Lynch syndrome patients.

Authors:  Michael D Walsh; Margaret C Cummings; Daniel D Buchanan; Wendy M Dambacher; Sven Arnold; Diane McKeone; Rebecca Byrnes; Melissa A Barker; Barbara A Leggett; Michael Gattas; Jeremy R Jass; Amanda B Spurdle; Joanne Young; Andreas Obermair
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2008-02-29       Impact factor: 12.531

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  Importance of PCR-based Tumor Testing in the Evaluation of Lynch Syndrome-associated Endometrial Cancer.

Authors:  Amanda S Bruegl; Annessa Kernberg; Russell R Broaddus
Journal:  Adv Anat Pathol       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 3.875

2.  Tumor mismatch repair immunohistochemistry and DNA MLH1 methylation testing of patients with endometrial cancer diagnosed at age younger than 60 years optimizes triage for population-level germline mismatch repair gene mutation testing.

Authors:  Daniel D Buchanan; Yen Y Tan; Michael D Walsh; Mark Clendenning; Alexander M Metcalf; Kaltin Ferguson; Sven T Arnold; Bryony A Thompson; Felicity A Lose; Michael T Parsons; Rhiannon J Walters; Sally-Ann Pearson; Margaret Cummings; Martin K Oehler; Penelope B Blomfield; Michael A Quinn; Judy A Kirk; Colin J Stewart; Andreas Obermair; Joanne P Young; Penelope M Webb; Amanda B Spurdle
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-12-09       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Clinical Challenges Associated with Universal Screening for Lynch Syndrome-Associated Endometrial Cancer.

Authors:  Amanda S Bruegl; Kari L Ring; Molly Daniels; Bryan M Fellman; Diana L Urbauer; Russell R Broaddus
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2016-12-13

Review 4.  How Should We Test for Lynch Syndrome? A Review of Current Guidelines and Future Strategies.

Authors:  Richard Gallon; Peter Gawthorpe; Rachel L Phelps; Christine Hayes; Gillian M Borthwick; Mauro Santibanez-Koref; Michael S Jackson; John Burn
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 5.  Diagnosis of Lynch Syndrome and Strategies to Distinguish Lynch-Related Tumors from Sporadic MSI/dMMR Tumors.

Authors:  Julie Leclerc; Catherine Vermaut; Marie-Pierre Buisine
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 6.639

6.  MLH1 promoter hypermethylation predicts poorer prognosis in mismatch repair deficiency endometrial carcinomas.

Authors:  Enami Kaneko; Naoki Sato; Tae Sugawara; Aya Noto; Kazue Takahashi; Kenichi Makino; Yukihiro Terada
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2021-08-04       Impact factor: 4.401

7.  Clinicopathological significance of deficient DNA mismatch repair and MLH1 promoter methylation in endometrioid endometrial carcinoma.

Authors:  Annukka Pasanen; Mikko Loukovaara; Ralf Bützow
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2020-02-14       Impact factor: 7.842

8.  Performance characteristics of screening strategies to identify Lynch syndrome in women with ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Soyoun Rachel Kim; Alicia Tone; Raymond H Kim; Matthew Cesari; Blaise A Clarke; Lua Eiriksson; Tae Hart; Melyssa Aronson; Spring Holter; Alice Lytwyn; Manjula Maganti; Leslie Oldfield; Steven Gallinger; Marcus Q Bernardini; Amit M Oza; Bojana Djordjevic; Jordan Lerner-Ellis; Emily Van de Laar; Danielle Vicus; Trevor J Pugh; Aaron Pollett; Sarah E Ferguson
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2020-08-18       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  An Analysis of Clinical, Surgical, Pathological and Molecular Characteristics of Endometrial Cancer According to Mismatch Repair Status. A Multidisciplinary Approach.

Authors:  Giulia Dondi; Sara Coluccelli; Antonio De Leo; Simona Ferrari; Elisa Gruppioni; Alessandro Bovicelli; Lea Godino; Camelia Alexandra Coadă; Alessio Giuseppe Morganti; Antonio Giordano; Donatella Santini; Claudio Ceccarelli; Daniela Turchetti; Pierandrea De Iaco; Anna Myriam Perrone
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-09-29       Impact factor: 5.923

10.  Efficacy of PD-1 Inhibitor Combined with Bevacizumab in Treatment of Advanced Endometrial Cancer Patients with Mismatch Repair Deficiency (dMMR)/High-Level Microsatellite Instability (MSI-H).

Authors:  Ying Liao; Changhua Zhu; Xiaoxia Song; Jiugen Ruan; Yao Ding; Yuan Chen; Qiujuan Yang
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2022-03-24
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.