Pandu P Nugroho1,2, Siti Alyaa S Ghozali1,2, Daniel D Buchanan3,4,5, Mia I Pisano6, Jeanette C Reece7. 1. Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, West Java, Indonesia. 2. Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia. 3. Colorectal Oncogenomics Group, Department of Clinical Pathology, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia. 4. University of Melbourne Centre for Cancer Research, Parkville, VIC, Australia. 5. Genomic Medicine and Family Cancer Clinic, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, VIC, Australia. 6. Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia. 7. Neuroepidemiology Unit, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Level 3 207 Bouverie Street, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia. jreece@unimelb.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lynch-like syndrome (LLS) tumors have similar clinicopathological features to Lynch syndrome (LS) tumors but have no identifiable pathogenic germline mismatch repair gene variant. However, cancer risks in LLS patients and first-degree relatives (FDRs) are not well defined. METHODS: To clarify LLS-associated cancer risks, a systematic review of all studies examining all cancer risks in LLS was performed. Searching of Medline, Embase, Pubmed, Cochrane and CINAHL databases and reference/citation checking identified relevant studies published between January 1, 1980 and February 11, 2021. Joanna Briggs Institute Appraisal Tools assessed the risk of bias. RESULTS: Six studies (five cohort/one cross-sectional) were eligible for study inclusion. One study found no difference in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence between LLS and LS patients or CRC risks at aged 70 years. Three studies found CRC incidence in LLS FDRs was higher than the general population but lower than LS FDRs. Two studies showed no difference in CRC diagnosis age between LLS patients and LS patients. Endometrial cancer risks in LLS patients were higher than the general population but lower than LS patients. CONCLUSION: Evidence of elevated CRC risks in LLS patients and FDRs supports increased colonoscopy surveillance strategies for LLS patients and FDRs in line with current recommendations for LS. Due to heterogeneity amongst LLS populations, extended intervals between screening may be advised for low-risk families. Studies to resolve the molecular characterization and definition of LLS are needed to clarify cancer risks associated with LLS which in turn may individualize surveillance strategies for LLS patients and families.
BACKGROUND: Lynch-like syndrome (LLS) tumors have similar clinicopathological features to Lynch syndrome (LS) tumors but have no identifiable pathogenic germline mismatch repair gene variant. However, cancer risks in LLS patients and first-degree relatives (FDRs) are not well defined. METHODS: To clarify LLS-associated cancer risks, a systematic review of all studies examining all cancer risks in LLS was performed. Searching of Medline, Embase, Pubmed, Cochrane and CINAHL databases and reference/citation checking identified relevant studies published between January 1, 1980 and February 11, 2021. Joanna Briggs Institute Appraisal Tools assessed the risk of bias. RESULTS: Six studies (five cohort/one cross-sectional) were eligible for study inclusion. One study found no difference in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence between LLS and LS patients or CRC risks at aged 70 years. Three studies found CRC incidence in LLS FDRs was higher than the general population but lower than LS FDRs. Two studies showed no difference in CRC diagnosis age between LLS patients and LS patients. Endometrial cancer risks in LLS patients were higher than the general population but lower than LS patients. CONCLUSION: Evidence of elevated CRC risks in LLS patients and FDRs supports increased colonoscopy surveillance strategies for LLS patients and FDRs in line with current recommendations for LS. Due to heterogeneity amongst LLS populations, extended intervals between screening may be advised for low-risk families. Studies to resolve the molecular characterization and definition of LLS are needed to clarify cancer risks associated with LLS which in turn may individualize surveillance strategies for LLS patients and families.
Authors: Sophie Chima; Jeanette C Reece; Kristi Milley; Shakira Milton; Jennifer G McIntosh; Jon D Emery Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2019-11-28 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Mark Clendenning; Daniel D Buchanan; Michael D Walsh; Belinda Nagler; Christophe Rosty; Bryony Thompson; Amanda B Spurdle; John L Hopper; Mark A Jenkins; Joanne P Young Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Freddie Bray; Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rebecca L Siegel; Lindsey A Torre; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Karolin Bucksch; Silke Zachariae; Stefan Aretz; Reinhard Büttner; Elke Holinski-Feder; Stefanie Holzapfel; Robert Hüneburg; Matthias Kloor; Magnus von Knebel Doeberitz; Monika Morak; Gabriela Möslein; Jacob Nattermann; Claudia Perne; Nils Rahner; Wolff Schmiegel; Karsten Schulmann; Verena Steinke-Lange; Christian P Strassburg; Deepak B Vangala; Jürgen Weitz; Markus Loeffler; Christoph Engel Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2020-05-24 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Mev Dominguez-Valentin; Julian R Sampson; Toni T Seppälä; Sanne W Ten Broeke; John-Paul Plazzer; Sigve Nakken; Christoph Engel; Stefan Aretz; Mark A Jenkins; Lone Sunde; Inge Bernstein; Gabriel Capella; Francesc Balaguer; Huw Thomas; D Gareth Evans; John Burn; Marc Greenblatt; Eivind Hovig; Wouter H de Vos Tot Nederveen Cappel; Rolf H Sijmons; Lucio Bertario; Maria Grazia Tibiletti; Giulia Martina Cavestro; Annika Lindblom; Adriana Della Valle; Francisco Lopez-Köstner; Nathan Gluck; Lior H Katz; Karl Heinimann; Carlos A Vaccaro; Reinhard Büttner; Heike Görgens; Elke Holinski-Feder; Monika Morak; Stefanie Holzapfel; Robert Hüneburg; Magnus von Knebel Doeberitz; Markus Loeffler; Nils Rahner; Hans K Schackert; Verena Steinke-Lange; Wolff Schmiegel; Deepak Vangala; Kirsi Pylvänäinen; Laura Renkonen-Sinisalo; John L Hopper; Aung Ko Win; Robert W Haile; Noralane M Lindor; Steven Gallinger; Loïc Le Marchand; Polly A Newcomb; Jane C Figueiredo; Stephen N Thibodeau; Karin Wadt; Christina Therkildsen; Henrik Okkels; Zohreh Ketabi; Leticia Moreira; Ariadna Sánchez; Miquel Serra-Burriel; Marta Pineda; Matilde Navarro; Ignacio Blanco; Kate Green; Fiona Lalloo; Emma J Crosbie; James Hill; Oliver G Denton; Ian M Frayling; Einar Andreas Rødland; Hans Vasen; Miriam Mints; Florencia Neffa; Patricia Esperon; Karin Alvarez; Revital Kariv; Guy Rosner; Tamara Alejandra Pinero; María Laura Gonzalez; Pablo Kalfayan; Douglas Tjandra; Ingrid M Winship; Finlay Macrae; Gabriela Möslein; Jukka-Pekka Mecklin; Maartje Nielsen; Pål Møller Journal: Genet Med Date: 2019-07-24 Impact factor: 8.822