Mohamed H Abdel-Rahman1, Klarke M Sample2, Robert Pilarski3, Tomas Walsh4, Timothy Grosel2, Daniel Kinnamon3, Getachew Boru2, James B Massengill2, Lynn Schoenfield5, Ben Kelly6, David Gordon6, Peter Johansson7, Meghan J DeBenedictis8, Arun Singh8, Silvia Casadei4, Frederick H Davidorf2, Peter White6, Andrew W Stacey9, James Scarth10, Ellie Fewings10, Marc Tischkowitz11, Mary-Claire King12, Nicholas K Hayward7, Colleen M Cebulla2. 1. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Havener Eye Institute, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio; Division of Human Genetics, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Electronic address: Mohamed.abdel-rahman@osumc.edu. 2. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Havener Eye Institute, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. 3. Division of Human Genetics, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. 4. Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 5. Department of Pathology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. 6. The Institute for Genomic Medicine, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio. 7. QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia. 8. Department of Ophthalmic Oncology, Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 9. Department of Ophthalmology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 10. Academic Laboratory of Medical Genetics and National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom. 11. Academic Laboratory of Medical Genetics and National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; East Anglian Medical Genetics Service, Cambridge University Hospitals, Cambridge, United Kingdom. 12. Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To identify susceptibility genes associated with hereditary predisposition to uveal melanoma (UM) in patients with no detectable germline BAP1 alterations. DESIGN: Retrospective case series from academic referral centers. PARTICIPANTS: Cohort of 154 UM patients with high risk of hereditary cancer defined as patients with 1 or more of the following: (1) familial UM, (2) young age (<35 years) at diagnosis, (3) personal history of other primary cancers, and (4) family history of 2 or more primary cancers with no detectable mutation or deletion in BAP1 gene. METHODS: Whole exome sequencing, a cancer gene panel, or both were carried out. Probands included 27 patients with familial UM, 1 patient with bilateral UM, 1 patient with congenital UM, and 125 UM patients with strong personal or family histories, or both, of cancer. Functional validation of variants was carried out by immunohistochemistry, reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, and genotyping. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical characterization of UM patients with germline alterations in known cancer genes. RESULTS: We identified actionable pathogenic variants in 8 known hereditary cancer predisposition genes (PALB2, MLH1, MSH6, CHEK2, SMARCE1, ATM, BRCA1, and CTNNA1) in 9 patients, including 3 of 27 patients (11%) with familial UM and 6 of 127 patients (4.7%) with a high risk for cancer. Two patients showed pathogenic variants in CHEK2 and PALB2, whereas variants in the other genes each occurred in 1 patient. Biallelic inactivation of PALB2 and MLH1 was observed in tumors from the respective patients. The frequencies of pathogenic variants in PALB2, MLH1, and SMARCE1 in UM patients were significantly higher than the observed frequencies in noncancer controls (PALB2: P = 0.02; odds ratio, 8.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-30.6; MLH1: P = 0.04; odds ratio, 25.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-143; SMARCE1: P = 0.001; odds ratio, 2047; 95% confidence interval, 52-4.5e15, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The study provided moderate evidence of gene and disease association of germline mutations in PALB2 and MLH1 with hereditary predisposition to UM. It also identified several other candidate susceptibility genes. The results suggest locus heterogeneity in predisposition to UM. Genetic testing for hereditary predisposition to cancer is warranted in UM patients with strong personal or family history of cancers, or both.
PURPOSE: To identify susceptibility genes associated with hereditary predisposition to uveal melanoma (UM) in patients with no detectable germline BAP1 alterations. DESIGN: Retrospective case series from academic referral centers. PARTICIPANTS: Cohort of 154 UMpatients with high risk of hereditary cancer defined as patients with 1 or more of the following: (1) familial UM, (2) young age (<35 years) at diagnosis, (3) personal history of other primary cancers, and (4) family history of 2 or more primary cancers with no detectable mutation or deletion in BAP1 gene. METHODS: Whole exome sequencing, a cancer gene panel, or both were carried out. Probands included 27 patients with familial UM, 1 patient with bilateral UM, 1 patient with congenital UM, and 125 UMpatients with strong personal or family histories, or both, of cancer. Functional validation of variants was carried out by immunohistochemistry, reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, and genotyping. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical characterization of UMpatients with germline alterations in known cancer genes. RESULTS: We identified actionable pathogenic variants in 8 known hereditary cancer predisposition genes (PALB2, MLH1, MSH6, CHEK2, SMARCE1, ATM, BRCA1, and CTNNA1) in 9 patients, including 3 of 27 patients (11%) with familial UM and 6 of 127 patients (4.7%) with a high risk for cancer. Two patients showed pathogenic variants in CHEK2 and PALB2, whereas variants in the other genes each occurred in 1 patient. Biallelic inactivation of PALB2 and MLH1 was observed in tumors from the respective patients. The frequencies of pathogenic variants in PALB2, MLH1, and SMARCE1 in UMpatients were significantly higher than the observed frequencies in noncancer controls (PALB2: P = 0.02; odds ratio, 8.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-30.6; MLH1: P = 0.04; odds ratio, 25.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-143; SMARCE1: P = 0.001; odds ratio, 2047; 95% confidence interval, 52-4.5e15, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The study provided moderate evidence of gene and disease association of germline mutations in PALB2 and MLH1 with hereditary predisposition to UM. It also identified several other candidate susceptibility genes. The results suggest locus heterogeneity in predisposition to UM. Genetic testing for hereditary predisposition to cancer is warranted in UMpatients with strong personal or family history of cancers, or both.
Authors: Getachew Boru; Timothy W Grosel; Robert Pilarski; Meredith Stautberg; James B Massengill; Joanne Jeter; Arun Singh; Meghan J Marino; Joseph P McElroy; Frederick H Davidorf; Colleen M Cebulla; Mohamed H Abdel-Rahman Journal: Genes Chromosomes Cancer Date: 2019-04-23 Impact factor: 5.006
Authors: Linton T Evans; Jack Van Hoff; William F Hickey; Miriam J Smith; D Gareth Evans; William G Newman; David F Bauer Journal: J Neurosurg Pediatr Date: 2015-06-26 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Małgorzata Solnik; Natalia Paduszyńska; Anna M Czarnecka; Kamil J Synoradzki; Yacoub A Yousef; Tomasz Chorągiewicz; Robert Rejdak; Mario Damiano Toro; Sandrine Zweifel; Katarzyna Dyndor; Michał Fiedorowicz Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-06-27 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Timothy W Grosel; Matthew Karl; Robert T Pilarski; Frederick H Davidorf; Mohamed H Abdel-Rahman; Colleen M Cebulla Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2021-01-06 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Nakul Singh; Rahul Singh; Randy Chris Bowen; Mohamed H Abdel-Rahman; Arun D Singh Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2020-12-11 Impact factor: 5.258