2001
DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-135-8_part_1-200110160-00007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bethesda Guidelines: Relation to Microsatellite Instability and MLH1 Promoter Methylation in Patients with Colorectal Cancer

Abstract: The Bethesda guidelines are useful for selecting patients for microsatellite instability testing. MLH1 and MSH2 testing should be recommended in all patients with colorectal cancer and microsatellite instability who fulfill at least one Bethesda criterion. MLH1 promoter methylation may accompany rather than initiate carcinogenesis in patients with colorectal cancer who have mismatch repair gene defects.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
36
0
2

Year Published

2002
2002
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
36
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Tumors with defective MMR tend to occur in younger patients, more often occur in the proximal colon, are more often mucinous, and frequently show a Crohn's-like lymphoid infiltrate or tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] In our study, none of the mucinous carcinomas or LAMNs with extra-appendiceal spread (considered well-differentiated mucinous carcinoma by some) demonstrated defective MMR. Our results are similar to those of Kabbani et al 40 who were unable to demonstrate MSI in 30 appendiceal adenocarcinomas.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 75%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Tumors with defective MMR tend to occur in younger patients, more often occur in the proximal colon, are more often mucinous, and frequently show a Crohn's-like lymphoid infiltrate or tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] In our study, none of the mucinous carcinomas or LAMNs with extra-appendiceal spread (considered well-differentiated mucinous carcinoma by some) demonstrated defective MMR. Our results are similar to those of Kabbani et al 40 who were unable to demonstrate MSI in 30 appendiceal adenocarcinomas.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…7 Several investigators have reported that colorectal carcinomas with defective MMR often show distinctive clinicopathologic features including location in the proximal colon, younger patient age, mucinous differentiation, and a host-immune response characterized by a Crohn's-like lymphoid reaction or tumor infiltrating lymphocytes. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] Serrated colonic polyps (hyperplastic polyps, mixed hyperplastic and adenomatous polyps, and serrated adenomas), particularly right-sided ones, are also associated with defective MMR 2,21 and are regarded as the precursor lesions for colorectal carcinomas with MSI, thus forming the basis of a 'serrated pathway' of colorectal tumorigenesis. 21 Appendiceal carcinomas, in contrast to 'generic colorectal carcinoma', often show mucinous differentiation and are per-force right-sided.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The same yield of about 50% is found for families with less clinical indications of HNPCC but which, in addition, have MSI-high tumours (Terdiman et al, 2001;Raedle et al, 2001). Among families that only fulfil clinical criteria, usually not as stringent as the Amsterdam criteria, mutations are detected in about 30% of kindreds (Wijnen et al, 1998a;Bapat et al, 1999;Lamberti et al, 1999;Syngal et al, 2000;Wahlberg et al, 2002).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…Virtually all colorectal tumours from MSH2 or MLH1 mutation carriers show microsatellite instability (MSI), which reflects the defect in DNA-mismatch-repair, and absence of expression of the MMR gene product involved. MSI is an important but not a specific marker of a germline MMR gene defect: the instability can also be due to acquired hypermethylation of MLH1 (Raedle et al, 2001). A minority of HNPCC families has a MSH6 defect or, exceptionally, a mutation in one of the other MMR genes (Liu et al, 2001).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…11,13,15,16 The clinical diagnosis of Lynch syndrome has historically been based on the Amsterdam criteria, although the revised Bethesda criteria are commonly used. [17][18][19] In 1990, the Amsterdam criteria were initially developed as a research tool to enrich for a more homogeneous population, but when used clinically, these criteria identify only ~60% of patients with Lynch syndrome. 20,21 This lack of sensitivity led to the development of the revised criteria (Amsterdam II Criteria), which take into account the presence of extracolonic cancers and have a detection sensitivity of ~80%.…”
Section: Brief Clinical Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%