Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Basic concepts for genetic testing in common hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes

  • Published:
Current Colorectal Cancer Reports

Abstract

Approximately 5% of colorectal cancers are associated with an autosomal dominantly inherited colon cancer syndrome. The two most common familial colon cancer syndromes are hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC), also called Lynch syndrome, and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). In many families with these syndromes, the causative mutation can be identified by genetic testing of an affected individual. If an affected individual tests positive for a disease-causing mutation, unaffected, at-risk family members can have genetic testing to determine whether they have inherited the cancer susceptibility mutation, and a personalized cancer surveillance strategy can be adopted. Genetic testing greatly enhances cancer risk assessment in these families; however, the complicated nature of interpretation of the results of gene testing and the emotional impact of the result require that testing be carried out in conjunction with patient education and informed consent by a provider who has a good appreciation for the challenges. This article describes the genetic testing strategy in HNPCC and FAP.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Katballe N, Juul S, Christensen M, et al.: Patient accuracy of reporting on hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer-related malignancy in family members. Br J Surg 2001, 88:1228–1233.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. American Gastroenterological Association: American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement: hereditary colorectal cancer and genetic testing. Gastroenterology 2001, 121:195–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. American Society of Clinical Oncology: Statement of the American Society of Clinical Oncology: genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. J Clin Oncol 1996, 14:1730–1736.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Joint Test and Technology Transfer Committee Working Group: Genetic testing for colon cancer: joint statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and American Society of Human Genetics. Genet Med 2000, 2:362–366.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Geller G, Botkin JR, Green MJ, et al.: Genetic testing for susceptibility to adult-onset cancer: the process and content of informed consent. JAMA 1997, 277:1467–1474.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lynch HT, de la Chapelle A: Genetic susceptibility to nonpolyposisc colorectal cancer. J Med Genet 1999, 36:801–818.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hampel H, Frankel W, Martin E, et al.: Screening for the Lynch Syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer). N Engl J Med 2005, 352:1851–1860. This article supports the use of MSI and IHC as a screening tool for all colon cancers. In their evaluation several patients were detected as having a mismatch repair defect that would have been missed by following the revised Bethesda criteria.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Vasen HFA, Wijnen JT, Menko FH, et al.: Cancer risk in families with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer diagnosed by mutation analysis. Gastroenterol 1996, 110:1020–1027.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Aarnio M, Sankila R, Pukkala E, et al.: Cancer risk in mutation carriers of DNA-mismatch-repair genes. Int J Cancer 1999, 81:214–218.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mecklin JP, Jarvinen HJ: Clinical features of colorectal carcinoma in cancer family syndrome. Dis Colon Rectum 1986, 29:160–164.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hendriks Y, Wagner A, Morreau H, et al.: Cancer risk in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer due to MSH6 mutations: impact on counseling and surveillance. Gastroenterology 2004, 127:17–25. Highlights the phenotypic difference between MSH6 carriers and MLH1/MSH2 carriers. Identifies the increased risk for endometrial cancer in MSH6 female carriers and the lower risk and later age of onset for other cancers in MSH6 versus MLH1/MSH2 carriers. Article points out that some families with MSH6 germline mutations will not meet the Amsterdam criteria and that MSI and IHC analysis are sensitive tolls to identify families with MSH6 germline mutations.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lin KM, Shashidharan M, Thorson AG, et al.: Cumulative incidence of colorectal and extracolonic cancers in MLH1 and MSH2 mutation carriers of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 1998, 2:67–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Scott RJ, McPhillips M, Meldrum CJ, and the Hunter Family Cancer Service: Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer in 95 families: differences and similarities between mutation- positive and mutation-negative kindreds. Am J Hum Genet 2001, 68:118–127.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Watson P, Butzoz R, Lynch HT, and the International Collaborative Group on HNPCC: The clinical features of ovarian cancer in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2001, 82:223–228.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Peltomaki P: Deficient DNA mismatch repair: a common etiologic factor for colon cancer. Hum Molec Genet 2001, 10:735–740. This paper briefly reviews the biochemical process of DNA mismatch repair and how loss of this function is related to both HNPCC and sporadic CRC. The authors describe the full spectrum of mutations in DNA mismatch repair genes that have been found in HNPCC families, the importance of epigenetic mechanisms (methylation of MLH1) of defective mismatch repair in sporadic CRCs, and the links between defective mismatch repair and high mutation rates in important growth regulatory genes. This paper is useful for readers who want to learn more about how mismatch repair deficiency leads to an increased cancer risk in both hereditary and sporadic colon cancer.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Miyaki M, Konishi M, Tanaka K, et al.: Germ line mutation of MSH6 as the cause of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Nat Genet 1997, 17:271–272.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Vasen HFA, Watson P, Mecklinn JP, Lynch HT, and the ICGHNPCC: New clinical criteria for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC, Lynch syndrome) proposed by the international collaborative group on HNPCC. Gastroenterology 1999, 116:1453–1456. This important paper describes the Amsterdam II criteria, which include the extracolonic tumors that are found in HNPCC. These criteria recommend that many HNPCC families who do not meet the original strict Amsterdam criteria should be referred for genetic counseling and offered DNA testing or targeted surveillance. The article describes the extracolonic cancers and their incidence in HNPCC families.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lindor N, Rabe K, Petersen G, et al.: Lower cancer incidence in Amsterdam 1 criteria families without mismatch repair deficiency familial colorectal cancer type X. JAMA 2005, 293:1979–1985. Identifies two distinct hereditary cancer syndromes in families that meet Amsterdam criteria, those that have a mismatch repair defect and those without, as determined by MSI and IHC. Also delineates the distinctly different cancer risks and age of cancer diagnosis between these two groups.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Muller-Koch Y, Vogelsang H, Kopp R, et al.: HNPCC-clinical and molecular evidence for a new entity of hereditary colorectal cancer. Gut 2005, in press. Shows the clinical and molecular evidence for a subgroup of families that meet Amsterdam criteria but do not have Lynch syndrome by germline mutation testing and MSI, but have a separate colon cancer syndrome with different cancer risks and age of onset. This study also identifies differences in histology and location of colon cancers in these two groups. This is important because the cancer risk and surveillance in the two groups will differ.

  20. Worthley D, Walsh M, Barker M, et al.: Familial mutations in PMS2 can cause autosomal dominant hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 2005, 128:1431–1436.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hienonen T, Laidho P, Salovaara R, et al.: Little evidence of MLH3 in colorectal cancer predisposition. Int J Cancer 2003, 106:292–296.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Syngal S, Fox EA, Eng C, et al.: Sensitivity and specificity of clinical criteria for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer associated mutations in MSH2 and MLH1. J Med Genet 2000, 37:641–645. This is a key validation paper for genetic testing in HNPCC. The authors examined the value of the Amsterdam and Bethesda criteria in identifying subjects with mutations in their mismatch repair genes, and found that the first three Bethesda criteria were the most sensitive for finding mutations. The paper provides an approach to more streamlined Bethesda criteria that would be easier to use in a clinical setting, and makes recommendations about which patients should proceed directly to sequencing and which should have MSI screening prior to sequencing.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. American Medical Association: Identifying and Managing Risk for Hereditary Nonpolyposis Colorectal Cancer and Endometrial Cancer. Chicago: American Medical Association; 2001. This review of HNPCC includes easy to follow guidelines that explain how to approach genetic testing in families at risk for HNPCC. It discusses clinical criteria, interpretation of genetic test results, and counseling before and after testing.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Shia J, Klimstra D, Nafa K, et al.: Value of immunohistochemical detection of DNA mismatch repair proteins in predicting germline mutation in hereditary colorectal neoplasms. Am J Surg Pathol 2005, 29:96–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Caldes T, Godino J, Sanchez A, et al.: Immunohistochemistry and microsatellite instability testing for selecting MLH1, MSH2 and MSH6 mutation carriers in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Oncol Rep 2004, 12:621–629.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Pinol V, Castells A, Andreu M, et al.: Accuracy of revised Bethesda guidelines, microsatellite instability, and immunohistochemistry for the identification of patients with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. JAMA 2005, 293:1986–1994.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Casey G, Lindor N, Papdopoulos N, et al.: Conversion analysis for mutation detection in MLH1 and MSH2 in patients with colorectal cancer. JAMA 293:799–809. The article evaluated the conversion technology in increasing detection rates of large genomic deletions and rearrangements. It provides an increase of diagnostic yield in genetic testing compared with genomic DNA sequencing alone. Is an important technology for improving the detection rate of germline mutations in Lynch syndrome.

  28. Myriad Genetic Laboratories. http://myriadtests.com

  29. Evans DG, Guy SP, Thakker N, et al.: Non-penetrance and late appearance of polyps in families with familial adenomatous polyposis. Gut 1993, 34:1389–1393.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Gardner EJ, Richards RC: Multiple cutaneous and subcutaneous lesions occurring simultaneously with hereditary polyposis and osteomatosis. Am J Hum Genet 1953, 5:139–147.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Houlston R, Crabtree M, Phillips R, Tomlinson I: Explaining differences in the severity of familial adenomatous polyposis and the search for modifier genes. Gut 2001, 48:1–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Hernegger GS, Moore HG, Guillem JG: Attenuated familial adenomatous polyposis: an evolving and poorly understood entity. Dis Colon Rectum 2002, 45:127–136.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Muto T, Kamiya J, Sawada T, et al.: Small ’flat adenoma’ of the large bowel with special reference to its clinicopathologic features. Dis Colon Rectum 1985, 28:847–851.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Spiroio L, Olschwang S, Groden J, et al.: Alleles of the APC gene: an attenuated form of familial polyposis. Cell 1993, 75:951–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lamlum H, Al Tassan N, Jaeger E, et al.: Germline APC variants in patients with multiple colorectal adenomas, with evidence for the particular importance of E1317Q. Hum Mol Genet 2000, 9:2215–2221.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Leblanc R: Familial adenomatous polyposis and benign intracranial tumors: a new variant of Gardner’s syndrome. Can J Neurol Sci 2000, 27:341–346.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Bisgaard ML, Fenger K, Bulow S, et al.: Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP): frequency, penetrance, and mutation rate. Hum Mutat 1994, 3:121–125.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Al-Tassan N, Chmiel NH, Maynard J, et al.: Inherited variants of MYH associated with somatic G:C-->:A mutations in colorectal tumors. Nat Genet 2002, 30:227–232.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Fearnhead NS, Britton MP, Bodmer WF: The ABC of APC. Hum Mol Genet 2001, 10:721–733. This is a comprehensive and very readable review of the structure and function of the APC gene. The paper briefly describes the clinical features of FAP and then focuses on the APC gene and protein. It describes the types of mutations that occur in the APC gene, the functional domains of the gene APC protein, and the biochemical and biologic functions of the normal APC protein. This review is valuable for the reader who desires a more detailed genetic, biochemical, and biologic understanding of FAP.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Sieber OM, Lamlum H, Crabtree MD, et al.: Whole-gene APC deletions cause classical familial adenomatous polyposis, but not attenuated polyposis or ’multiple’ colorectal adenomas. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2002, 99:2954–2958.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Laken SJ, Papadopoulos N, Petersen GM, et al.: Analysis of masked mutations in familial adenomatous polyposis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1999, 96:2322–2326.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Cooke MS, Evans MD, Dizdaroglu M, Lunec J: Oxidative DNA damage: mechanisms, mutation, and disease. Faseb J 2003, 17:1195–1214.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Enholm S, Hienonen T, Suomalainen A, et al.: Proportion and phenotype of MYH-associated colorectal neoplasia in a population-based series of Finnish colorectal cancer patients. Am J Pathol 2003, 163:827–832.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Halford SE, Rowan AJ, Lipton L, et al.: Germline mutations but not somatic changes at the MYH locus contribute to the pathogenesis of unselected colorectal cancers. Am J Pathol 2003, 162:1545–1548.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Sampson JR, Dolwani S, Jones S, et al.: Autosomal recessive colorectal adenomatous polyposis due to inherited mutations of MYH. Lancet 2003, 362:39–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Sieber OM, Lipton L, Crabtree M, et al.: Multiple colorectal adenomas, classic adenomatous polyposis, and germ-line mutations in MYH. N Engl J Med 2003, 348:791–799.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Denver Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University of Colorado Hospital Hereditary Cancer Clinic, 1055 Clermont Street, 80220, Denver, CO, USA

    Dennis Ahnen MD

Authors
  1. Lisen Axell MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dennis Ahnen MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kristina Markey MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Axell, L., Ahnen, D. & Markey, K. Basic concepts for genetic testing in common hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes. Curr colorectal cancer rep 1, 73–84 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11888-005-0003-6

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11888-005-0003-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation