No abstract

Germline mutations in DNA polymerase ɛ (POLE) and δ (POLD1) have been recently identified in families with multiple colorectal adenomas and colorectal cancer (CRC). All reported cases carried POLE c.1270C>G (p.Leu424Val) or POLD1 c.1433G>A (p.Ser478Asn) mutations. Due to the scarcity of cases reported so far, an accurate clinical phenotype has not been defined. We aimed to assess the prevalence of these recurrent mutations in unexplained familial and early-onset CRC and polyposis, and to add additional information to define the clinical characteristics of mutated cases. A total of 858 familial/early onset CRC and polyposis patients were studied: 581 familial and early-onset CRC cases without mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency, 86 cases with MMR deficiency and 191 polyposis cases. Mutation screening was performed by KASPar genotyping assays and/or Sanger sequencing of the involved exons. POLE p.L424V was identified in a 28-year-old polyposis and CRC patient, as a de novo mutation. None of the 858 cases studied carried POLD1 p.S478N. A new mutation, POLD1 c.1421T>C (p.Leu474Pro), was identified in a mismatch repair proficient Amsterdam II family. Its pathogenicity was supported by cosegregation in the family, in silico predictions, and previously published yeast assays. POLE and POLD1 mutations explain a fraction of familial CRC and polyposis. Sequencing the proofreading domains of POLE and POLD1 should be considered in routine genetic diagnostics. Until additional evidence is gathered, POLE and POLD1 genetic testing should not be restricted to polyposis cases, and the presence of de novo mutations, considered.

Purpose: The present study aimed to determine the prevalence of MUTYH mutations in patients with multiple colonic polyps and to explore the best strategy for diagnosing MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP) in these patients.Experimental Design: This study included 405 patients with at least 10 colonic polyps each. All cases were genetically tested for the three most frequent MUTYH mutations. Whole-gene analysis was performed in heterozygous patients and in 216 patients lacking the three most frequent mutations. Polyps from 56 patients were analyzed for the KRAS-Gly12Cys and BRAF V600E somatic mutations.Results: Twenty-seven (6.7%) patients were diagnosed with MAP, of which 40.8% showed serrated polyps. The sensitivity of studying only the three common variants was 74.1%. Of 216 patients without any monoallelic mutation in common variants, whole-gene analysis revealed biallelic pathogenic mutation in only one. G396D mutation was associated with serrated lesions and older age at diagnosis. There was a strong association between germinal MUTYH mutation and KRAS Gly12Cys somatic mutation in polyps. BRAF V600E mutation was found in 74% of serrated polyps in MUTYH-negative patients and in none of the polyps of MAP patients.Conclusions: We observed a low frequency of MUTYH mutations among patients with multiple adenomatous and serrated polyps. The MAP phenotype frequently included patients with serrated polyps, especially when G396D mutation was involved. Our results show that somatic molecular markers of polyps can be useful in identifying MAP cases and support the need for the complete MUTYH gene analysis only in patients heterozygous for recurrent variants.

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to validate a molecular classification of colorectal cancer (CRC) based on microsatellite instability (MSI), CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) status, BRAF, and KRAS and investigate each subtype’s response to chemotherapy.DesignThis retrospective observational study included a population-based cohort of 878 CRC patients. We classified tumours into five different subtypes based on BRAF and KRAS mutation, CIMP status, and MSI. Patients with advanced stage II (T4N0M0) and stage III tumours received 5-fluoruracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy or no adjuvant treatment based on clinical criteria. The main outcome was disease-free survival (DFS).ResultsPatients with the combination of microsatellite stable (MSS) tumours, BRAF mutation and CIMP positive exhibited the worst prognosis in univariate (log rank P<0.0001) and multivariate analyses (hazard ratio 1.75, 95% CI 1.05–2.93, P = 0.03) after adjusting for age, sex, chemotherapy, and TNM stage. Treatment with 5-FU-based regimens improved prognosis in patients with the combination of MSS tumours, KRAS mutation and CIMP negative (log rank P = 0.003) as well as in patients with MSS tumours plus BRAF and KRAS wild-type and CIMP negative (log-rank P<0.001). After adjusting for age, sex, and TNM stage in the multivariate analysis, only patients with the latter molecular combination had independently improved prognosis after adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio 2.06, 95% CI 1.24–3.44, P = 0.005).ConclusionWe confirmed the prognostic value of stratifying CRC according to molecular subtypes using MSI, CIMP status, and somatic KRAS and BRAF mutation. Patients with traditional chromosomally unstable tumours obtained the best benefit from adjuvant 5-FU-based chemotherapy.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Our results suggest a negligible prevalence of MLH1 constitutional epimutations in unselected cases of CRC. Therefore, MLH1 constitutional epimutation analysis should be conducted only for patients who fulfil the rBG and who lack MLH1 expression with methylated MLH1.