Literature DB >> 28059100

A tailored approach to BRAF and MLH1 methylation testing in a universal screening program for Lynch syndrome.

Tomer Adar1, Linda H Rodgers2, Kristen M Shannon2, Makoto Yoshida1, Tianle Ma1, Anthony Mattia3,4, Gregory Y Lauwers3, Anthony J Iafrate3, Daniel C Chung1,2.   

Abstract

To determine the correlation between BRAF genotype and MLH1 promoter methylation in a screening program for Lynch syndrome (LS), a universal screening program for LS was established in two medical centers. Tumors with abnormal MLH1 staining were evaluated for both BRAF V600E genotype and MLH1 promoter methylation. Tumors positive for both were considered sporadic, and genetic testing was recommended for all others. A total 1011 colorectal cancer cases were screened for Lynch syndrome, and 148 (14.6%) exhibited absent MLH1 immunostaining. Both BRAF and MLH1 methylation testing were completed in 126 cases. Concordant results (both positive or both negative) were obtained in 86 (68.3%) and 16 (12.7%) cases, respectively, with 81% concordance overall. The positive and negative predictive values for a BRAF mutation in predicting MLH1 promoter methylation were 98.9% and 41%, respectively, and the negative predictive value fell to 15% in patients ≥70 years old. Using BRAF genotyping as a sole test to evaluate cases with absent MLH1 staining would have increased referral rates for genetic testing by 2.3-fold compared with MLH1 methylation testing alone (31% vs 13.5%, respectively, P<0.01). However, a hybrid approach that reserves MLH1 methylation testing for BRAF wild-type cases only would significantly decrease the number of methylation assays performed and reduce the referral rate for genetic testing to 12.7%. A BRAF mutation has an excellent positive predictive value but poor negative predictive value in predicting MLH1 promoter methylation. A hybrid use of these tests may reduce the number of low-risk patients referred to genetic counseling and facilitate wider implementation of Lynch syndrome screening programs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28059100     DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2016.211

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mod Pathol        ISSN: 0893-3952            Impact factor:   7.842


  9 in total

Review 1.  Phenotypic and genotypic heterogeneity of Lynch syndrome: a complex diagnostic challenge.

Authors:  Henry T Lynch; Stephen Lanspa; Trudy Shaw; Murray Joseph Casey; Marc Rendell; Mark Stacey; Theresa Townley; Carrie Snyder; Megan Hitchins; Joan Bailey-Wilson
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.375

2.  Assessment of Tumor Sequencing as a Replacement for Lynch Syndrome Screening and Current Molecular Tests for Patients With Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Heather Hampel; Rachel Pearlman; Mallory Beightol; Weiqiang Zhao; Daniel Jones; Wendy L Frankel; Paul J Goodfellow; Ahmet Yilmaz; Kristin Miller; Jason Bacher; Angela Jacobson; Electra Paskett; Peter G Shields; Richard M Goldberg; Albert de la Chapelle; Brian H Shirts; Colin C Pritchard
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 31.777

Review 3.  Liquid Biopsy as a Source of Nucleic Acid Biomarkers in the Diagnosis and Management of Lynch Syndrome.

Authors:  Gergely Buglyó; Jakub Styk; Ondrej Pös; Ádám Csók; Vanda Repiska; Beáta Soltész; Tomas Szemes; Bálint Nagy
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-04-13       Impact factor: 6.208

4.  Comparison of universal screening in major lynch-associated tumors: a systematic review of literature.

Authors:  George Kunnackal John; Vipin Das Villgran; Christine Caufield-Noll; Francis M Giardiello
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 2.375

5.  Mutation Status and Immunohistochemical Correlation of KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF in 260 Chinese Colorectal and Gastric Cancers.

Authors:  Qiwei Yang; Sibo Huo; Yujie Sui; Zhenwu Du; Haiyue Zhao; Yu Liu; Wei Li; Xin Wan; Tongjun Liu; Guizhen Zhang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2018-10-26       Impact factor: 6.244

6.  Microsatellite Instability assessment in Black South African Colorectal Cancer patients reveal an increased incidence of suspected Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  M McCabe; Y Perner; R Magobo; P Magangane; S Mirza; C Penny
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-10-21       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 7.  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

8.  Integrating Tumor Sequencing Into Clinical Practice for Patients With Mismatch Repair-Deficient Lynch Syndrome Spectrum Cancers.

Authors:  Katherine Dixon; Mary-Jill Asrat; Angela C Bedard; Kristin Binnington; Katie Compton; Carol Cremin; Nili Heidary; Zoe Lohn; Niki Lovick; Mary McCullum; Allison Mindlin; Melanie O'Loughlin; Tammy Petersen; Cheryl Portigal-Todd; Jenna Scott; Genevieve St-Martin; Jennifer Thompson; Ruth Turnbull; Sze Wing Mung; Quan Hong; Marjorie Bezeau; Ian Bosdet; Tracy Tucker; Sean Young; Stephen Yip; Gudrun Aubertin; Katherine A Blood; Jennifer Nuk; Sophie Sun; Kasmintan A Schrader
Journal:  Clin Transl Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-08-16       Impact factor: 4.488

9.  Worldwide variation in lynch syndrome screening: case for universal screening in low colorectal cancer prevalence areas.

Authors:  George Kunnackal John; Vipin Das Villgran; Christine Caufield-Noll; Francis Giardiello
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2020-09-11       Impact factor: 2.375

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.