Matthew B Yurgelun1, Brian Allen2, Rajesh R Kaldate2, Karla R Bowles2, Thaddeus Judkins2, Praveen Kaushik2, Benjamin B Roa2, Richard J Wenstrup2, Anne-Renee Hartman2, Sapna Syngal3. 1. Division of Population Sciences, Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: Matthew_Yurgelun@DFCI.Harvard.edu. 2. Myriad Genetic Laboratories, Salt Lake City, Utah. 3. Division of Population Sciences, Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Division of Gastroenterology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Multigene panels are commercially available tools for hereditary cancer risk assessment that allow for next-generation sequencing of numerous genes in parallel. However, it is not clear if these panels offer advantages over traditional genetic testing. We investigated the number of cancer predisposition gene mutations identified by parallel sequencing in individuals with suspected Lynch syndrome. METHODS: We performed germline analysis with a 25-gene, next-generation sequencing panel using DNA from 1260 individuals who underwent clinical genetic testing for Lynch syndrome from 2012 through 2013. All patients had a history of Lynch syndrome-associated cancer and/or polyps. We classified all identified germline alterations for pathogenicity and calculated the frequencies of pathogenic mutations and variants of uncertain clinical significance (VUS). We also analyzed data on patients' personal and family history of cancer, including fulfillment of clinical guidelines for genetic testing. RESULTS: Of the 1260 patients, 1112 met National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for Lynch syndrome testing (88%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 86%-90%). Multigene panel testing identified 114 probands with Lynch syndrome mutations (9.0%; 95% CI, 7.6%-10.8%) and 71 with mutations in other cancer predisposition genes (5.6%; 95% CI, 4.4%-7.1%). Fifteen individuals had mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2; 93% of these met the NCCN criteria for Lynch syndrome testing and 33% met NCCN criteria for BRCA1 and BRCA2 analysis (P = .0017). An additional 9 individuals carried mutations in other genes linked to high lifetime risks of cancer (5 had mutations in APC, 3 had bi-allelic mutations in MUTYH, and 1 had a mutation in STK11); all of these patients met NCCN criteria for Lynch syndrome testing. A total of 479 individuals had 1 or more VUS (38%; 95% CI, 35%-41%). CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with suspected Lynch syndrome, multigene panel testing identified high-penetrance mutations in cancer predisposition genes, many of which were unexpected based on patients' histories. Parallel sequencing also detected a high number of potentially uninformative germline findings, including VUS.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Multigene panels are commercially available tools for hereditary cancer risk assessment that allow for next-generation sequencing of numerous genes in parallel. However, it is not clear if these panels offer advantages over traditional genetic testing. We investigated the number of cancer predisposition gene mutations identified by parallel sequencing in individuals with suspected Lynch syndrome. METHODS: We performed germline analysis with a 25-gene, next-generation sequencing panel using DNA from 1260 individuals who underwent clinical genetic testing for Lynch syndrome from 2012 through 2013. All patients had a history of Lynch syndrome-associated cancer and/or polyps. We classified all identified germline alterations for pathogenicity and calculated the frequencies of pathogenic mutations and variants of uncertain clinical significance (VUS). We also analyzed data on patients' personal and family history of cancer, including fulfillment of clinical guidelines for genetic testing. RESULTS: Of the 1260 patients, 1112 met National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for Lynch syndrome testing (88%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 86%-90%). Multigene panel testing identified 114 probands with Lynch syndrome mutations (9.0%; 95% CI, 7.6%-10.8%) and 71 with mutations in other cancer predisposition genes (5.6%; 95% CI, 4.4%-7.1%). Fifteen individuals had mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2; 93% of these met the NCCN criteria for Lynch syndrome testing and 33% met NCCN criteria for BRCA1 and BRCA2 analysis (P = .0017). An additional 9 individuals carried mutations in other genes linked to high lifetime risks of cancer (5 had mutations in APC, 3 had bi-allelic mutations in MUTYH, and 1 had a mutation in STK11); all of these patients met NCCN criteria for Lynch syndrome testing. A total of 479 individuals had 1 or more VUS (38%; 95% CI, 35%-41%). CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with suspected Lynch syndrome, multigene panel testing identified high-penetrance mutations in cancer predisposition genes, many of which were unexpected based on patients' histories. Parallel sequencing also detected a high number of potentially uninformative germline findings, including VUS.
Authors: Bhramar Mukherjee; John Oliver Delancey; Leon Raskin; Jessica Everett; Joanne Jeter; Colin B Begg; Irene Orlow; Marianne Berwick; Bruce K Armstrong; Anne Kricker; Loraine D Marrett; Robert C Millikan; Hoda Anton Culver; Stefano Rosso; Roberto Zanetti; Peter A Kanetsky; Lynn From; Stephen B Gruber Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Aung Ko Win; James G Dowty; Sean P Cleary; Hyeja Kim; Daniel D Buchanan; Joanne P Young; Mark Clendenning; Christophe Rosty; Robert J MacInnis; Graham G Giles; Alex Boussioutas; Finlay A Macrae; Susan Parry; Jack Goldblatt; John A Baron; Terrilea Burnett; Loïc Le Marchand; Polly A Newcomb; Robert W Haile; John L Hopper; Michelle Cotterchio; Steven Gallinger; Noralane M Lindor; Katherine M Tucker; Ingrid M Winship; Mark A Jenkins Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2014-01-17 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: J P Struewing; P Hartge; S Wacholder; S M Baker; M Berlin; M McAdams; M M Timmerman; L C Brody; M A Tucker Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1997-05-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: H J Järvinen; M Aarnio; H Mustonen; K Aktan-Collan; L A Aaltonen; P Peltomäki; A De La Chapelle; J P Mecklin Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Marina E Croitoru; Sean P Cleary; Nando Di Nicola; Michael Manno; Teresa Selander; Melyssa Aronson; Mark Redston; Michelle Cotterchio; Julia Knight; Robert Gryfe; Steven Gallinger Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2004-11-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Heidi D Nelson; Miranda Pappas; Bernadette Zakher; Jennifer Priest Mitchell; Leila Okinaka-Hu; Rongwei Fu Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2014-02-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Klaudia Holeckova; Katarina Baluchova; Mark Hives; Ludovit Musak; Jan Kliment; Maria Skerenova Journal: In Vivo Date: 2020 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.155
Authors: Avrum Spira; Mary L Disis; John T Schiller; Eduardo Vilar; Timothy R Rebbeck; Rafael Bejar; Trey Ideker; Janine Arts; Matthew B Yurgelun; Jill P Mesirov; Anjana Rao; Judy Garber; Elizabeth M Jaffee; Scott M Lippman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2016-09-16 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Charité Ricker; Julie O Culver; Katrina Lowstuter; Duveen Sturgeon; Julia D Sturgeon; Christopher R Chanock; William J Gauderman; Kevin J McDonnell; Gregory E Idos; Stephen B Gruber Journal: Cancer Genet Date: 2016-01-12
Authors: Elena M Stoffel; Erika Koeppe; Jessica Everett; Peter Ulintz; Mark Kiel; Jenae Osborne; Linford Williams; Kristen Hanson; Stephen B Gruber; Laura S Rozek Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2017-11-14 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Y Nancy You; Ester Borras; Kyle Chang; Brandee A Price; Maureen Mork; George J Chang; Miguel A Rodriguez-Bigas; Brian K Bednarski; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Eduardo Vilar Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Naresh T Gunaratnam; Mehmet Akce; Riad Al Natour; Angela N Bartley; Ann F Fioritto; Kristen Hanson; Uri Ladabaum Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-03-29 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Kari L Ring; Amanda S Bruegl; Brian A Allen; Eric P Elkin; Nanda Singh; Anne-Renee Hartman; Molly S Daniels; Russell R Broaddus Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2016-07-22 Impact factor: 7.842