No abstract

Lynch syndrome is a heritable condition caused by a heterozygous germline inactivating mutation of the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes, most commonly the MLH1 gene. However, one third of the identified alterations are missense variants, for which the clinical significance is unclear in many cases. We have identified three MLH1 missense alterations (p.(Glu736Lys), p.(Pro640Thr) and p.(Leu73Pro)) in six individuals from large Tunisian families. For none of these alterations, a classification of pathogenicity was available, consequently diagnosis, predictive testing and targeted surveillance in affected families was impossible. We therefore performed functional laboratory testing using a system testing stability as well as catalytic activity that includes clinically validated reference variants. Both p.(Leu73Pro) and p.(Pro640Thr) were found to be non-functional due to severe defects in protein stability and catalytic activity. In contrast, p.(Glu736Lys) was comparable to the wildtype protein and therefore considered a neutral substitution. Analysis of residue conservation and of the structural roles of the substituted residues corroborated these findings. In conjunction with the available clinical data, two variants fulfil classification criteria for class 4 “likely pathogenic”. The findings of this work clarify the mechanism of pathogenicity of two unclear MLH1 variants and enables predictive testing and targeted surveillance in members of carrier families worldwide.

Background Lynch syndrome (LS), the most common inherited form of colorectal cancer (CRC), is responsible for 3% of all cases of CRC. LS is caused by a mismatch repair gene defect and is characterized by a high risk for CRC, endometrial cancer and several other cancers. Identification of LS is of utmost importance because colonoscopic surveillance substantially improves a patient’s prognosis. Recently, a network of physicians in Middle Eastern and North African (ME/NA) countries was established to improve the identification and management of LS families. The aim of the present survey was to evaluate current healthcare for families with LS in this region. Methods A questionnaire was developed that addressed the following issues: availability of clinical management guidelines for LS; attention paid to family history of cancer; availability of genetic services for identification and diagnosis of LS; and assessment of knowledge of LS surveillance. Members of the network and authors of recent papers on LS from ME/NA and neighbouring countries were invited to participate in the survey and complete the online questionnaire. Results A total of 55 individuals were invited and 19 respondents from twelve countries including Algeria, Azerbaijan, Cyprus, Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, Tunisia, and Turkey completed the questionnaire. The results showed that family history of CRC is considered in less than half of the surveyed countries. Guidelines for the management of LS are available in three out of twelve countries. The identification and selection of families for genetic testing were based on clinical criteria (Amsterdam criteria II or Revised Bethesda criteria) in most countries, and only one country performed universal screening. In most of the surveyed countries genetic services were available in few hospitals or only in a research setting. However, surveillance of LS families was offered in the majority of countries and most frequently consisted of regular colonoscopy. Conclusion The identification and management of LS in ME/NA countries are suboptimal and as a result most LS families in the region remain undetected. Future efforts should focus on increasing awareness of LS amongst both the general population and doctors, and on the improvement of the infrastructure in these countries.

Background: Background:Approximately 10 to 15 percent of patients have refractory Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) that either does not respond to initial therapy or progresses after an initial partial response. Refractory HL poses a major problem of care, especially since there is currently no consensus regarding second or third line chemotherapy.