Familial colorectal cancer: a concept revisited

Objective  The family history of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) shows an increased risk of disease although evident inherited syndromes are demonstrable in only a small percentage of patients. The purpose of this study was to identify factors that might suggest an inherited component in the transmission of CRC.
Method  The study monitored 880 consecutive patients between 1980 and 2005 treated for CRC.
Results  Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) was found in only one patient, and a classical mutation of hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer was found in only two patients. The risk assessment was possible mainly because of factors such as early onset CRC, the presence of multiple primary tumours and a high risk family history. Considering these 36 more patients were suspected to be high risk and referred for further genetic testing. At least one first-degree relative with CRC was reported in 140 patients. In 49 patients, CRC was diagnosed before 50 years of age. Multiple primary tumours, colonic or extra colonic, synchronous or metachronous were found in 136 patients.
Conclusion  Our study suggests that if only patients with identified mutations are taken into consideration, then the percentage of evident hereditary colon cancer is very low, but this percentage quickly increases if we make marginal adjustments to the identifying criteria. It seems that it is the physician's clinical suspicion, more than the fulfilment of rigid criteria, which plays a fundamental role in the timely identification and a subsequent focused treatment of patients with hereditary CRC.     

Update on multi‐gene panel testing and communication of genetic test results

With technological advances, multi‐gene panel testing has become increasingly used to identify patients at risk for hereditary breast cancer (HBC). There are currently evidence‐based interventions and breast cancer screening strategies that exist for cancer prevention and early detection among patients with HBC. Moreover, in addition to the personal impact of identifying HBC, this information may be shared with at‐risk family members to amplify the benefits of testing and subsequent care among those at high risk. Opportunities and challenges with the utilization of updated multi‐gene panel testing for HBC, including: (a) tumor sequencing with germline consequences; (b) genetic counseling implications; and (c) strategies to improve the communication of genetic test results to family members will be reviewed. With the advances and expansion of genetic testing, all health care providers need to be updated on both the importance and complexities of HBC counseling and testing, in order to optimize patient care.     

The breast surgeon's role in BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing

Five percent to 10% of all women who develop breast cancer carry a hereditary mutation in the genes BRCA1 or BRCA2. Genetic testing is now clinically available, and the results of such testing can dramatically alter a patient's risks for an ipsilateral or contralateral primary breast cancer and ovarian cancer. Therefore, genetic testing will become integral in tailoring surveillance, chemoprevention, and surgical management plans for patients at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes. Such results will also impact the cancer risks for the patient's nuclear and extended family members. Surgeons will play a pivotal role in eliciting personal and family histories from patients, determining which of those histories is suggestive of a germline mutation, facilitating referrals for genetic counseling and testing, and incorporating the results of genetic testing into the patient's short- and long-term management plans.     

Managing Young Colorectal Cancer: A UK and Irish Perspective

Objective

Young patients with familial syndromes have an increased metachronous cancer rate. Effective management is possible by identifying this high-risk group prior to index colectomy. The study surveys the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) membership preoperative evaluation and clinical management in young patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

Method

An electronic survey was sent to the membership of the ACPGBI. The survey polled members on clinical scenarios relating to young-onset CRC patients. We were particularly concerned with preoperative management strategies, the extent of colectomy, and postoperative surveillance. Survey responses were collated and analysed.

Results

A total of 124 members responded to the survey and 74 completed the survey. Of these, 87.8 % would proceed to colectomy without preoperative tumor or genetic testing. Decisions regarding the extent of colectomy depended on family history. A total of 67 (90.6 %) would offer a limited colectomy with no family history, 49 (66.2 %) in a patient with familial CRC type X, 29 (39.2 %) in a young patient with Lynch syndrome. A similar trend was seen with young rectal cancer. Only 16 surgeons (21.6 %) could identify a syndrome of MYH-associated polyposis (MAP).

Conclusion

The majority of ACPGBI members will not offer preoperative risk testing based on a young age alone; however, the majority would alter their surgical strategy based on the results of this testing. MAP is poorly recognized by ACPGBI members and therefore an opportunity exists for education among members.

What is new in this paper?

This study is the first paper to survey the ACPGBI membership on management practices in young-onset CRC. Members are poor in adopting preoperative testing, alter surgical strategy based on a familial syndrome, with a minority recognizing MAP. An opportunity to improve education on young CRC patients exists.     

Hereditary Breast Cancer: Practical Pursuit for Clinical Translation

The benefits of a skillful medical history and histologic confirmation of relevant pathology are potentially lifesaving. Appropriately directed DNA testing based on these initial steps provides an opportunity for clinical translation into a cancer prevention program targeted to family members. Unfortunately, cancer prevention strategies that are based on genetics are frequently overlooked or underestimated in the overall practical management of patients at high risk for breast cancer as well as integral cancers that constitute a hereditary breast cancer syndrome. DNA testing, particularly for BRCA1 and BRCA2 in hereditary breast-ovarian cancer syndrome and p53 in the Li-Fraumeni syndrome, and many other syndromes is commercially available for inclusion in a cancer control program and merits attention in this major public health problem. It is clear that the time and effort expended for a hereditary cancer syndrome diagnosis may significantly reduce both morbidity and mortality in breast cancer. We have found that genetic counselors can partner with the clinical physicians and make significant contributions to this labor-intensive effort.     

HEREDITY,MOLECULAR GENETICS AND COLORECTAL CANCER: A REVIEW

It is estimated that the hereditary polyposis and non-polyposis colorectal cancer (CRC) syndromes, which have an autosomal dominant pattern of inheritance, represent less than 10% of the total CRC burden. Thus, more than 90% of all cases of CRC have previously been considered to arise ‘sporadically’, with no identifiable genetic link. However, recent clinical evidence now suggests that a significant proportion of CRC seen in the general population may involve an inherited genetic susceptibility. Therefore, constructing an accurate family tree on all patients with a family history of CRC is an essential part of identifying families with an increased risk for CRC who could then be offered screening. Also. molecular genetic study of colorectal adenomas and carcinomas has led to a proposed genetic model of colorectal tumorigenesis which involves interactions between oncogenes and tumour suppressor genes. This information has important potential implications for screening, determining prognosis and for providing multiple targets for altering the sequence of malignant transformation.     

Consensus Guidelines on Genetic` Testing for Hereditary Breast Cancer from the American Society of Breast Surgeons

Background

The purpose of this consensus guideline is to outline recommendations for genetic testing that medical professionals can use to assess hereditary risk for breast cancer.

Methods

Literature review included large datasets, basic and clinical science publications, and recent updated national guidelines. Genetic testing to assess hereditary risk of cancer is a complex, broad, and dynamic area of medical research. The dominant focus of this guideline is limited in scope to breast cancer.

Results

There is a lack of consensus among experts regarding which genes among many should be tested in different clinical scenarios. There is also variation in the degree of consensus regarding the understanding of risk and appropriate clinical management of mutations in many genes.

Conclusions

Genetic testing should be made available to all patients with a personal history of breast cancer. Recent data are reviewed that support genetic testing being offered to each patient with breast cancer (newly diagnosed or with a personal history). If genetic testing is performed, such testing should include BRCA1/BRCA2 and PALB2, with other genes as appropriate for the clinical scenario and family history. For patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer, identification of a mutation may impact local treatment recommendations. Patients who had genetic testing previously may benefit from updated testing. Genetic testing should be made available to patients without a history of breast cancer who meet National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Finally, variants of uncertain significance are not clinically actionable and these patients should be managed based on their individual risk factors.

     

Family Information Service Participation Increases the Rates of Mutation Testing Among Members of Families with BRCA1/2 Mutations

Abstract:  Some members of hereditary breast-ovarian cancer (HBOC) families may not participate in BRCA testing to determine their mutation status in part because they are unaware of their cancer risk and the availability of BRCA testing. Participation in a family information service (FIS), of which we have provided more than 100 sessions during the past 30 years, has been seen to effectively allow family members to be educated regarding their cancer genetic risk and potential benefits from cancer control measures such as mutation testing. However, the effect of the FIS on the rate of mutation testing has not been studied. One thousand five hundred seventy-four eligible (>18-year old, at a 25% or higher pedigree risk) members from 60 extended HBOC families with BRCA1/2 mutations were invited to attend a FIS to learn about their risk and undergo genetic testing. The rates of mutation testing were compared between those who had attended an FIS, and those who had not with chi-squared test and logistic regression analysis. Seventy five percent (334/444) of FIS attendees had undergone mutation testing following or during an FIS which was significantly higher than the 33.8% (382/1130) rate among nonattendees (p   <   0.0001). Logistic regression analysis showed that FIS attendance, breast-ovarian cancer history, gender, and age were significant variables for undertaking a mutation test. FIS attendance significantly increased the rate of mutation testing among high-risk family members.     

Importance of genetic counseling and molecular diagnosis testing in families at high risk for cancer

Individuals with a family history of certain cancer types are at higher risk to develop a malignancy during their lifetime. The availability of the family history is a basic component for genetic counseling of these patients to determine illnesses that may affect other family members. The family history can help us to identify some inheritance patterns of cancer transmission among families. Nowadays it is possible to identify by clinical and molecular testing many of these familial cancer syndromes. The objective of this review is to provide a basis to the physician who the patient contacts first, in order to recognize the possibility of illnesses with a genetic transmission. This will allow the treating physician to refer the patient to a genetic specialist for possible molecular diagnosis of the illness.     

Preventive surgery for colon cancer in familial adenomatous polyposis and hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome

BACKGROUND: A better understanding of the molecular basis of hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes such as hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome (HNPCC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) has profound consequences for both the diagnosis and (prophylactic) treatment of (pre)malignant neoplastic lesions. DISCUSSION: Sequence analysis of the underlying genes for these conditions and the detection of disease-causing genetic alterations in an index patient enable predictive testing for individuals at risk within an affected family. However, the clinical implications of predictive molecular testing depend on the overall penetrance and variability in the expression of pathogenic mutations. The extent of these parameters differs considerably among the various known hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes. Hence the integration of genetic information into the daily surgical practice remains challenging. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides an update on the indications for family assessment, purpose and limitations of the genetic testing and resulting recommendations for prophylactic surgery in FAP and HNPCC.     

Awareness of heredity in colorectal cancer patients is insufficient among clinicians: a Norwegian population-based study

Objective  The assessment of family history and medical data is crucial in identifying families with Lynch syndrome (LS). Among consecutive colorectal cancer (CRC) patients, we aimed at identifying all patients with a hereditary predisposition, and to study a possible discrepancy with assessments made by the responsible clinicians.
Method  All consecutively diagnosed patients with CRC from two Norwegian hospitals were included, and information on family history was collected in a detailed interview. We assessed information in medical records, and tumours were examined for LS-associated histopathological features.
Results  Among 562 patients, there was no documentation of family history in 388 (69.0%) medical records, and in 174 (31.0%) patients, there was no clinical assessment of the information that was collected on family history. Based on detailed interviews and extended pathological examination, we found that 137 (24.4%) of the 562 patients could be classified as possible LS according to the Revised Bethesda Guidelines (RBG); and that 46 (33.6%) of these patients could be identified by family history alone.
Conclusion  Family history and relevant information in patient records can identify patients with possible LS. However, clinicians often fail to include information on hereditary factors and to assess relevant data in medical records. Familial CRC is therefore not acknowledged, and genetic counselling is not offered.     

Genetics and clinical practice in rheumatology

The dramatic advances made recently in human genome research are fueling considerable interest in genetic testing. A specific feature of genetic testing is that the results are final and impact not only the patient, but also the entire family. Those elements should be factored into the risk/benefit ratio evaluation. In France, legislation the differentiates diagnostic tests in symptomatic patients from predictive tests in asymptomatic patients with affected family members. Only multidisciplinary groups with both clinical and genetic expertise can order predictive tests. In all cases the physician must sign a statement that informed consent was obtained from the patient prior to testing. The test must be done in an accredited laboratory and the result communicated by the physician to the patient. Patient confidentiality must be respected, particularly regarding family members. In monogenic diseases, the diagnostic weight of genetic testing is often considerable, although the limitations should be borne in mind. In multifactorial diseases, genetic testing seeks to identify risk factors that are usually associated with a low level of risk. The result should be interpreted in the light of the clinical presentation, family history, and genetic background. The predictive value is closely dependent on the clinical presentation but is generally limited, most notably when family members are affected. Great care should be taken to avoid causing undue anxiety among individuals with positive test results. Diseases that illustrate these aspects include Paget's disease of bone, of which inherited variants caused by a mutation in a single gene on chromosome 5 have been identified recently, and rheumatoid arthritis, which is a multifactorial disease.     

Management of young onset colorectal cancer: divergent practice in the East of England

Aim According to the revised Bethesda Guidelines, colorectal cancer (CRC) occurring under age 50 years should be screened to exclude Lynch syndrome. However, in current practice in East Anglia, tumour screening is initiated only after genetics referral, reserved for those with a strong pedigree. This study aimed to determine how many patients with young‐onset CRC undergo tumour screening in hospitals in East Anglia. Method A retrospective case notes review over 5 years in four hospitals was undertaken to determine what proportion of those with young‐onset CRC underwent referral for tumour screening and to assess local practices in terms of patient counselling and management. Results One hundred and twenty‐two patients were included. There was an average yearly caseload of 6–9 patients per hospital. Documented family history was rare, as was counselling concerning metachronous and extra‐colonic tumour risk and CRC risk in relatives. The rate of referral for genetic testing varied from 44% to 65%. Postoperative colonoscopic surveillance was inconsistent. Conclusion Many patients with young‐onset CRC are managed as sporadic cancers, without Lynch syndrome having been excluded. This may have implications for survival of patients and any affected relatives. A streamlined management algorithm for tumour screening and genetics referral is recommended.     

Hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes: familial adenomatous polyposis and lynch syndrome

Familial colorectal cancer (CRC) accounts for 10% to 20% of all cases of CRC. Two major autosomal dominant forms of heritable CRC are familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and Lynch syndrome (also known as hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer). Along with the risk for CRC, both syndromes are associated with elevated risk for other tumors. Improved understanding of the genetic basis of these diseases has not only facilitated the identification and screening of at-risk individuals and the development of prophylactic or early-stage intervention strategies but also provided better insight into sporadic CRC. This article reviews the clinical and genetic characteristics of FAP and Lynch syndrome, recommended screening and surveillance practices, and appropriate surgical and nonsurgical interventions.     

Hereditary Breast Cancer: Risk Assessment Is the Easy Part

Individuals who seek genetic testing to determine hereditary risk of breast cancer may not be aware that genetic testing is uninformative in many high-risk families or that they may be at increased risk of other cancers as well. Many mistakenly believe that current genetic testing provides definitive information about the magnitude of cancer risk to carriers. This article describes the assessment of hereditary risk by pedigree analysis, epidemiology, and genetic testing within the cancer risk assessment and counseling setting, and discusses other information that helps patients to make informed health care decisions. Because the risk of ovarian cancer is increased in many families at high risk of breast cancer, information about prophylactic oophorectomy and hormone replacement therapy is essential. A case history is presented to show the efficacy of cancer risk assessment and counseling when genetic testing is uninformative. ▪     

Prophylaktische Chirurgie des Mamma- und Ovarialkarzinoms

New insights into the genetic basis of carcinogenesis have been obtained by modern molecular biological techniques. Several susceptibility genes are known. The hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2) and endometrial cancer in the context of the hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer syndrome (HNPCC), germline mutations in mismatch-repair genes, are the most frequent hereditary cancer syndromes in gynaecology. Mutations in TP53 (Li-Fraumeni syndrome) and PTEN (Cowden's disease), associated with increased risk of breast cancer, are responsible for a smaller portion of familial breast cancer.The risk of inheritance and disease can be identified and defined by investigating family history, risk calculation programs, and genetic testing. Afterwards, options of primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention can be formulated. Presently, prophylactic surgery is the only option proven by clinical trials that can reduce the mortality of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.     

A RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Study of the Management of Familial Gastric Cancer

Background

Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) represents a minority of gastric cancer (GC) cases. The goal of this study is to use a RAND/University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) appropriateness methodology to examine indications for genetic referral, CDH1 testing, and consideration of prophylactic total gastrectomy (PTG).

Methods

A multidisciplinary expert panel of 16 physicians from six countries scored 47 scenarios. Appropriateness of scenarios was scored from 1 (highly inappropriate) to 9 (highly appropriate). Median appropriateness scores (AS) of 1–3 were considered inappropriate, 4–6 uncertain, and 7–9 appropriate. Agreement was reached when 12 of 16 panelists scored the statement similarly. Appropriate scenarios agreed upon were subsequently scored for necessity.

Results

The panel felt that patients with family history of diffuse gastric cancer (DGC), lobular breast cancer, or multiple family members with GC should be referred for genetic assessment and multidisciplinary decision-making. The panel felt that it is appropriate for patients with DGC to have CDH1 mutation testing in a family with (1) ≥2 cases of GC, with at least one case of DGC diagnosed before age of 50 years; (2) ≥3 cases of GC diagnosed at any age, one or more of which is DGC; (3) a patient diagnosed with DGC and lobular breast carcinoma; or (4) patients diagnosed with DGC under age of 35 years. The panel felt that PTG should be offered to CDH1 mutation carriers 20 years or older.

Conclusions

Identification of genetic mutations in patients at risk for hereditary GC is important, and criteria for testing are suggested.     

�Ŵ��Է�Ϣ�ⲡ�Դ󳦰������ʼ��ٴ������ص�̽��

目的 研究遗传性非息肉病性大肠癌（ＨＮＰＣＣ）在大癌中的比例及临床病理特点。方法 收集和分析５５０例大肠癌的临床病理及随访资料，符合Ａｍｓｔｅｒｄａｍ标准或日本标准者诊断为ＨＮＰＣＣ。结果 ５５０例大肠癌中６例（１．１％）符合Ａｍｓｔｅｒｄａｍ标准，１９例（３．５％）符合日本标准。本组ＨＮＰＣＣ的临床病理特点是肿瘤发病年龄早，多位于右半结肠，粘液癌及多原发大肠癌多见，家族中肠外肿瘤增多，息肉伴随增     

Hereditary neuropathy with liability to pressure palsies (HNPP) in hand surgery: reminds and warn against a usually unrecognised disease

Tomacula is a rare hereditary disease due to a deletion on chromosome 17. Clinical presentation varies but patients usually complain of recurrent paraesthesiaes and palsies related to compression or trauma of a peripheral nerve. Diagnosis is based on electrophysiological studies, nerve biopsies and genetic tests. Implications for the patient and family members are a genetic counselling and some simple preventive measures. Although there is no curative treatment for this neuropathy, surgery can be useful for decompression of nerves and neurolysis. However, the surgical act increases the risk of nerve damage. Knowing about the diagnosis can help the patient and the surgical team avoid causing lesions.     

Towards population-based genetic screenings for breast and ovarian cancer: A comprehensive review from economic evaluations to patient perspectives

Genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer following genetic counseling is based on guidelines that take into account particular features of the personal and family history, and clinical criteria conferring a probability of having a BRCA mutation greater than 10% as a threshold for accessing the test. However, besides reducing mortality and social impact, the extension of screening programs also for healthy family members would allow a huge saving of the rising costs associated with these pathologies, supporting the choice of the “Test” strategy versus a “No Test” one. Analyses of different health care systems show that by applying the “Test” strategy on patients and their families, a decrease in breast and ovarian cancer cases is achieved, as well as a substantial decrease in costs of economic resources, including the costs of the clinical management of early detected tumors.In this review, we analyzed the most recent papers published on this topic and we summarized the findings on the economic evaluations related to breast and ovarian cancer population screenings. These results proved and validated that the population-wide testing approach is a more accurate screening and preventive intervention than traditional guidelines based on personal/family history and clinical criteria to reduce breast and ovarian cancer risk.