Extended microsatellite analysis in microsatellite stable, MSH2 and MLH1 mutation-negative HNPCC patients: Genetic reclassification and correlation with clinical features

Background: Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) is an autosomal dominant disorder predisposing to predominantly colorectal cancer (CRC) and endometrial cancer frequently due to germline mutations in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes, mainly MLH1, MSH2 and also MSH6 in families seen to demonstrate an excess of endometrial cancer. As a consequence, tumors in HNPCC reveal alterations in the length of simple repetitive genomic sequences like poly-A, poly-T, CA or GT repeats (microsatellites) in at least 90% of the cases. Aim of the Study: The study cohort consisted of 25 HNPCC index patients ( 19 Amsterdam positive, 6 Bethesda positive) who revealed a microsatellite stable (MSS) - or low instable (MSI-L) - tumor phenotype with negative mutation analysis for the MMR genes MLH1 and MSH2. An extended marker panel (BAT40, D10S197, D13S153, D18S58, MYCL1) was analyzed for the tumors of these patients with regard to three aspects. First, to reconfirm the MSI-L phenotype found by the standard panel; second, to find minor MSIs which might point towards an MSH6 mutation, and third, to reconfirm the MSS status of hereditary tumors. The reconfirmation of the MSS status of tumors not caused by mutations in the MMR genes should allow one to define another entity of hereditary CRC. Their clinical features were compared with those of 150 patients with sporadic CRCs. Results: In this way, 17 MSS and 8 MSI-L tumors were reclassified as 5 MSS, 18 MSI-L and even 2 MSI-H ( high instability) tumors, the last being seen to demonstrate at least 4 instable markers out of 10. Among all family members, 87 malignancies were documented. The mean age of onset for CRCs was the lowest in the MSI-H-phenotyped patients with 40.5 +/- 4.9 years (vs. 47.0 +/- 14.6 and 49.8 +/- 11.9 years in MSI-L- and MSS-phenotyped patients, respectively). The percentage of CRC was the highest in families with MSS-phenotyped tumors (88%), followed by MSI-L-phenotyped ( 78%) and then by MSI-H-phenotyped (67%) tumors. MSS tumors were preferentially localized in the distal colon supposing a similar biologic behavior like sporadic CRC. MSH6 mutation analysis for the MSI-L and MSI-H patients revealed one truncating mutation for a patient initially with an MSS tumor, which was reclassified as MSI-L by analyzing the extended marker panel. Conclusion: Extended microsatellite analysis serves to evaluate the sensitivity of the reference panel for HNPCC detection and permits phenotype confirmation or upgrading. Additionally, it confirms the MSS status of hereditary CRCs not caused by the common mutations in the MMR genes and provides hints to another entity of hereditary CRC. Copyright (C) 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel

Clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) interaction: separate intake and a non-omeprazole PPI the solution?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Dual therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel increases the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. Therefore, co-therapy with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is recommended by most guidelines. However, there are warnings against combining PPIs with clopidogrel because of their interactions with cytochrome P450 isoenzyme 2C19 (<it>CYP2C19</it>).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The effects of the combined or separate intake of 20 mg of omeprazole and 75 mg of clopidogrel on the clopidogrel-induced inhibition of platelet aggregation were measured in four healthy subjects whose <it>CYP2C19 </it>exon sequences were determined. The effects of co-therapy with 10 mg of rabeprazole were also examined.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Two subjects showed the wild-type <it>CYP2C19 </it>sequence. The concurrent intake of omeprazole had no effect on clopidogrel-induced platelet inhibition in these subjects. Two subjects were heterozygous for the *2 allele, with predicted reduced <it>CYP2C19 </it>activity. One of them was a clopidogrel non-responder. In the second heterozygous subject, omeprazole co-therapy reduced the clopidogrel anti-platelet effect when taken simultaneously or separately. However, the simultaneous intake of rabeprazole did not reduce the clopidogrel effect.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The clopidogrel-PPI interaction does not seem to be a PPI class effect. Rabeprazole did not affect the clopidogrel effect in a subject with a clear omeprazole-clopidogrel interaction. The separate intake of PPI and clopidogrel may not be sufficient to prevent their interaction.</p

XLMR in MRX families 29, 32, 33 and 38 results from the dup24 mutation in the ARX (Aristaless related homeobox) gene

BACKGROUND: X-linked mental retardation (XLMR) is the leading cause of mental retardation in males. Mutations in the ARX gene in Xp22.1 have been found in numerous families with both nonsyndromic and syndromic XLMR. The most frequent mutation in this gene is a 24 bp duplication in exon 2. Based on this fact, a panel of XLMR families linked to Xp22 was tested for this particular ARX mutation. METHODS: Genomic DNA from XLMR families linked to Xp22.1 was amplified for exon 2 in ARX using a Cy5 labeled primer pair. The resulting amplicons were sized using the ALFexpress automated sequencer. RESULTS: A panel of 11 families with X-linked mental retardation was screened for the ARX 24dup mutation. Four nonsyndromic XLMR families – MRX29, MRX32, MRX33 and MRX38 – were found to have this particular gene mutation. CONCLUSION: We have identified 4 additional XLMR families with the ARX dup24 mutation from a panel of 11 XLMR families linked to Xp22.1. This finding makes the ARX dup24 mutation the most common mutation in nonsyndromic XLMR families linked to Xp22.1. As this mutation can be readily tested for using an automated sequencer, screening should be considered for any male with nonsyndromic MR of unknown etiology

Biallelic MLH1 SNP cDNA expression or constitutional promoter methylation can hide genomic rearrangements causing Lynch syndrome

A positive family history, germline mutations in DNA mismatch repair genes, tumours with high microsatellite instability, and loss of mismatch repair protein expression are the hallmarks of hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome). However, in ~10-15% of cases of suspected Lynch syndrome, no disease-causing mechanism can be detected

Low-level APC mutational mosaicism is the underlying cause in a substantial fraction of unexplained colorectal adenomatous polyposis cases

BACKGROUND: In 30-50% of patients with colorectal adenomatous polyposis, no germline mutation in the known genes APC, causing familial adenomatous polyposis, MUTYH, causing MUTYH-associated polyposis, or POLE or POLD1, causing polymerase-proofreading-associated polyposis can be identified, although a hereditary aetiology is likely. This study aimed to explore the impact of APC mutational mosaicism in unexplained polyposis. METHODS: To comprehensively screen for somatic low-level APC mosaicism, high-coverage next-generation sequencing of the APC gene was performed using DNA from leucocytes and a total of 53 colorectal tumours from 20 unrelated patients with unexplained sporadic adenomatous polyposis. APC mosaicism was assumed if the same loss-of-function APC mutation was present in ≥2 anatomically separated colorectal adenomas/carcinomas per patient. All mutations were validated using diverse methods. RESULTS: In 25% (5/20) of patients, somatic mosaicism of a pathogenic APC mutation was identified as underlying cause of the disease. In 2/5 cases, the mosaic level in leucocyte DNA was slightly below the sensitivity threshold of Sanger sequencing; while in 3/5 cases, the allelic fraction was either very low (0.1-1%) or no mutations were detectable. The majority of mosaic mutations were located outside the somatic mutation cluster region of the gene. CONCLUSIONS: The present data indicate a high prevalence of pathogenic mosaic APC mutations below the detection thresholds of routine diagnostics in adenomatous polyposis, even if high-coverage sequencing of leucocyte DNA alone is taken into account. This has important implications for both routine work-up and strategies to identify new causative genes in this patient group

Role of germline aberrations affecting CTNNA1, MAP3K6 and MYD88 in gastric cancer susceptibility

Background In approximately 10% of all gastric cancer (GC) cases, a heritable cause is suspected. A subset of these cases have a causative germline CDH1 mutation; however, in most cases the cause remains unknown. Our objective was to assess to what extent these remaining cases may be explained by germline mutations in the novel candidate GC predisposing genes CTNNA1, MAP3K6 or MYD88. Methods We sequenced a large cohort of unexplained young and/or familial patients with GC (n=286) without a CDH1germline mutation for germline variants affecting CTNNA1, MAP3K6 and MYD88 using a targeted next-generation sequencing approach based on single-molecule molecular inversion probes. Results Predicted deleterious germline variants were not encountered in MYD88, but recurrently observed in CTNNA1 (n=2) and MAP3K6 (n=3) in our cohort of patients with GC. In contrast to deleterious variants in CTNNA1, deleterious variants in MAP3K6 also occur frequently in the general population. Conclusions Based on our results MAP3K6 should no longer be considered a GC predisposition gene, whereas deleterious CTNNA1 variants are confirmed as an infrequent cause of GC susceptibility. Biallelic MYD88 germline mutations are at most a very rare cause of GC susceptibility as no additional cases were identified.This study was funded by KWF Kankerbestrijding (grant number KUN2013-5876, RSvdP)

cDNA sequencing improves the detection of P53 missense mutations in colorectal cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Recently published data showed discrepancies beteween <it>P53 </it>cDNA and DNA sequencing in glioblastomas. We hypothesised that similar discrepancies may be observed in other human cancers.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>To this end, we analyzed 23 colorectal cancers for <it>P53 </it>mutations and gene expression using both DNA and cDNA sequencing, real-time PCR and immunohistochemistry.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found <it>P53 </it>gene mutations in 16 cases (15 missense and 1 nonsense). Two of the 15 cases with missense mutations showed alterations based only on cDNA, and not DNA sequencing. Moreover, in 6 of the 15 cases with a cDNA mutation those mutations were difficult to detect in the DNA sequencing, so the results of DNA analysis alone could be misinterpreted if the cDNA sequencing results had not also been available. In all those 15 cases, we observed a higher ratio of the mutated to the wild type template by cDNA analysis, but not by the DNA analysis. Interestingly, a similar overexpression of <it>P53 </it>mRNA was present in samples with and without <it>P53 </it>mutations.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In terms of colorectal cancer, those discrepancies might be explained under three conditions: 1, overexpression of mutated <it>P53 </it>mRNA in cancer cells as compared with normal cells; 2, a higher content of cells without <it>P53 </it>mutation (normal cells and cells showing <it>K-RAS </it>and/or <it>APC </it>but not <it>P53 </it>mutation) in samples presenting <it>P53 </it>mutation; 3, heterozygous or hemizygous mutations of <it>P53 </it>gene. Additionally, for heterozygous mutations unknown mechanism(s) causing selective overproduction of mutated allele should also be considered. Our data offer new clues for studying discrepancy in <it>P53 </it>cDNA and DNA sequencing analysis.</p

Role of germline aberrations affecting CTNNA1, MAP3K6 and MYD88 in gastric cancer susceptibility

Background: In approximately 10% of all gastric cancer (GC) cases, a heritable cause is suspected. A subset of these cases have a causative germline CDH1 mutation; however, in most cases the cause remains unknown. Our objective was to assess to what extent these remaining cases may be explained by germline mutations in the novel candidate GC predisposing genes CTNNA1, MAP3K6 or MYD88. Methods: We sequenced a large cohort of unexplained young and/or familial patients with GC (n=286) without a CDH1germline mutation for germline variants affecting CTNNA1, MAP3K6 and MYD88 using a targeted next-generation sequencing approach based on single-molecule molecular inversion probes. Results: Predicted deleterious germline variants were not encountered in MYD88, but recurrently observed in CTNNA1 (n=2) and MAP3K6 (n=3) in our cohort of patients with GC. In contrast to deleterious variants in CTNNA1, deleterious variants in MAP3K6 also occur frequently in the general population. Conclusions: Based on our results MAP3K6 should no longer be considered a GC predisposition gene, whereas deleterious CTNNA1 variants are confirmed as an infrequent cause of GC susceptibility. Biallelic MYD88 germline mutations are at most a very rare cause of GC susceptibility as no additional cases were identified