Colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma characteristics according to causative mismatch repair gene variant in Japanese colorectal surveillance for Lynch syndrome.
Advanced adenoma
Interval colorectal cancer
Lynch syndrome
Quality indicator
Surveillance stratification
Journal
Journal of gastroenterology
ISSN: 1435-5922
Titre abrégé: J Gastroenterol
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 9430794
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 Jun 2024
21 Jun 2024
Historique:
received:
30
03
2024
accepted:
12
06
2024
medline:
21
6
2024
pubmed:
21
6
2024
entrez:
20
6
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The optimal interval of colonoscopy (CS) surveillance in cases with Lynch syndrome (LS), and stratification according to the causative mismatch repair gene mutation, has received much attention. To verify a feasible and effective CS surveillance strategy, we investigated the colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence at different intervals and the characteristics of precancerous colorectal lesions of LS cases. This retrospective multicenter study was conducted in Japan. CRCs and advanced adenomas (AAs) in 316 LS cases with germline pathogenic variants (path_) were analyzed according to the data of 1,756 registered CS. The mean time interval for advanced CRCs (ACs) detected via CS surveillance was 28.7 months (95% confidence interval: 13.8-43.5). The rate of AC detection within (2.1%) and beyond 2 years (8.7%) differed significantly (p = 0.0003). AAs accounted for 43%, 46%, and 41% of lesions < 10 mm in size in the MLH1-, MSH2-, and MSH6-groups, respectively. The lifetime incidence of metachronous CRCs requiring intestinal resection for path_MLH1, path_MSH2, and path_MSH6 cases was 34%, 23%, and 14% in these cases, respectively. The cumulative CRC incidence showed a trend towards a 10-year delay for path_MSH6 cases as compared with that for path_MLH1 and path_MSH2 cases. In cases with path_MLH1, path_MSH2, and path_MSH6, maintaining an appropriate CS surveillance interval of within 2 years is advisable to detect of the colorectal lesion amenable to endoscopic treatment. path_MSH6 cases could be stratified with path_MLH1 and MSH2 cases in terms of risk of metachronous CRC and age of onset.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The optimal interval of colonoscopy (CS) surveillance in cases with Lynch syndrome (LS), and stratification according to the causative mismatch repair gene mutation, has received much attention. To verify a feasible and effective CS surveillance strategy, we investigated the colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence at different intervals and the characteristics of precancerous colorectal lesions of LS cases.
METHODS
METHODS
This retrospective multicenter study was conducted in Japan. CRCs and advanced adenomas (AAs) in 316 LS cases with germline pathogenic variants (path_) were analyzed according to the data of 1,756 registered CS.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The mean time interval for advanced CRCs (ACs) detected via CS surveillance was 28.7 months (95% confidence interval: 13.8-43.5). The rate of AC detection within (2.1%) and beyond 2 years (8.7%) differed significantly (p = 0.0003). AAs accounted for 43%, 46%, and 41% of lesions < 10 mm in size in the MLH1-, MSH2-, and MSH6-groups, respectively. The lifetime incidence of metachronous CRCs requiring intestinal resection for path_MLH1, path_MSH2, and path_MSH6 cases was 34%, 23%, and 14% in these cases, respectively. The cumulative CRC incidence showed a trend towards a 10-year delay for path_MSH6 cases as compared with that for path_MLH1 and path_MSH2 cases.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In cases with path_MLH1, path_MSH2, and path_MSH6, maintaining an appropriate CS surveillance interval of within 2 years is advisable to detect of the colorectal lesion amenable to endoscopic treatment. path_MSH6 cases could be stratified with path_MLH1 and MSH2 cases in terms of risk of metachronous CRC and age of onset.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38902413
doi: 10.1007/s00535-024-02128-5
pii: 10.1007/s00535-024-02128-5
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. Japanese Society of Gastroenterology.
Références
Lynch HT, Shaw MW, Magnuson CW, et al. Hereditary factors in cancer. Study of two large midwestern kindreds. Aech Arch Intern Med. 1966;117:206–12.
doi: 10.1001/archinte.1966.03870080050009
Idos G MS, Valle l. Lynch syndrome gene reviews. Available via DIALOG. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1211/ . Accessed 29 Jan 2024.
InSiGHT. Lynch syndrome. Available at https://www.insight-group.org/syndromes/lynch-syndrome/ . Accessed 29 Jan 2024.
Tanakaya K. Current clinical topics of Lynch syndrome. Int J Clin Oncol. 2019;24:1013–9.
doi: 10.1007/s10147-018-1282-7
pubmed: 29744602
Vasen HFA, Blanco I, Aktan-Collan K, et al. Revised guidelines for the clinical management of Lynch syndrome (HNPCC): recommendations by a group of European experts. Gut. 2013;62:812–23.
doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-304356
pubmed: 23408351
Vasen HF, Abdirahman M, Brohet R, et al. One to 2-year surveillance intervals reduce risk of colorectal cancer in families with Lynch syndrome. Gastroenterology. 2010;138:2300–6.
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2010.02.053
pubmed: 20206180
Engel C, Rahner N, Schulmann K, et al. Efficacy of annual colonoscopic surveillance in individuals with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;8:174–82.
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2009.10.003
pubmed: 19835992
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: genetic/familial high-risk assessment: colorectal. Version 1. 2023. http://www.nccn.org . Accessed 29 Jan 2024.
Bonadona V, Bonaïti B, Olschwang S, et al. Cancer risks associated with germline mutations in MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6 genes in Lynch syndrome. JAMA. 2011;305:2304–10.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.743
pubmed: 21642682
Ryan NAJ, Morris J, Green K, et al. Association of mismatch repair mutation with age at cancer onset in Lynch syndrome: implications for stratified surveillance strategies. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3:1702–6.
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.0619
pubmed: 28772289
pmcid: 5824283
Møller P, Seppälä T, Bernstein I, et al. Cancer incidence and survival in Lynch syndrome patients receiving colonoscopic and gynaecological surveillance: first report from the prospective Lynch syndrome database. Gut. 2017;66:464–72.
doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-309675
pubmed: 26657901
Engel C, Vasen HF, Seppälä T, et al. No difference in colorectal cancer incidence or stage at detection by colonoscopy among 3 countries with different Lynch syndrome surveillance policies. Gastroenterology. 2018;155:1400-9.e2.
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.07.030
pubmed: 30063918
Seppälä TT, Ahadova A, Dominguez-Valentin M, et al. Lack of association between screening interval and cancer stage in Lynch syndrome may be accounted for by over- diagnosis; a prospective Lynch syndrome database report. Hered Cancer Clin Pract. 2019;17:8.
doi: 10.1186/s13053-019-0106-8
pubmed: 30858900
pmcid: 6394091
Corley DA, Jensen CD, Marks AR, et al. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1298–306.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1309086
pubmed: 24693890
pmcid: 4036494
Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum. Japanese classification of colorectal, appendiceal, and anal carcinoma. J Anus Rectum Colon. 2019;18:175–95.
doi: 10.23922/jarc.2019-018
Brierley JD, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C, et al. UICC TNM classification of malignant tumours. 8th ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2017. p. 272.
Matthew DR, Iisif B, Roland V, et al. World endoscopy organization consensus statements on post-colonoscopy and post-imaging colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology. 2018;155:909–25.
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.05.038
Iino H, Simms L, Young J, et al. DNA microsatellite instability and mismatch repair protein loss in adenomas presenting in hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. Gut. 2000;47:37–42.
doi: 10.1136/gut.47.1.37
pubmed: 10861262
pmcid: 1727981
Sekine S, Mori T, Ogawa R, et al. Mismatch repair deficiency commonly precedes adenoma formation in Lynch syndrome-associated colorectal tumorigenesis. Mod Pathol. 2017;30:1144–51.
doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2017.39
pubmed: 28548127
Hatamori H, Chino A, Arai M, et al. Malignant potential of colorectal neoplasms in Lynch syndrome: an analysis of 325 lesions endoscopically treated at a single institute. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2021;51:737–43.
doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyab010
pubmed: 33558893
Sakamoto T, Matsuda T, Nakajima Y, et al. clinicopathological features of colorectal polyps: evaluation of the ‘predict, resect and discard’ strategies. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15:295–300.
doi: 10.1111/codi.12210
Ahadova A, von Knebel Doeberitz MK, Bläker H, et al. CTNNB1-mutant colorectal carcinomas with immediate invasive growth: A model of interval cancers in Lynch syndrome. Fam Cancer. 2016;15:579–86.
doi: 10.1007/s10689-016-9899-z
pubmed: 26960970
Ahadova A, Gallon R, Gebert J, et al. Three molecular pathways model colorectal carcinogenesis in Lynch syndrome. Int J Cancer. 2018;143:139–50.
doi: 10.1002/ijc.31300
pubmed: 29424427
Engel C, Ahadova A, Seppälä TT, et al. Associations of pathogenic variants in MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6 with risk of colorectal adenomas and tumors and with somatic mutations in patients with Lynch syndrome. Gastroenterology. 2020;158:1326–33.
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.12.032
pubmed: 31926173
Rondagh EJA, Gulikers S, Gómez-García EB, et al. Nonpolypoid colorectal neoplasms: a challenge in endoscopic surveillance of patients with Lynch syndrome. Endoscopy. 2013;45:257–64.
doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1326195
pubmed: 23440588
Rivero-Sánchez L, Arnau-Collell C, Herrero J, et al. White-Light endoscopy is adequate for Lynch syndrome surveillance in a randomized and noninferiority study. Gastroenterology. 2020;158:895-904.e1.
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.09.003
pubmed: 31520613
Perrod G, Samaha E, Rahmi G, et al. Impact of an optimized colonoscopic screening program for patients with Lynch syndrome: 6-Year results of a specialized French network. Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2018;11:1756284818775058.
doi: 10.1177/1756284818775058
pubmed: 29872454
pmcid: 5974573
Ahadova A, Seppälä TT, Engel C, et al. The “unnatural” history of colorectal cancer in Lynch syndrome: lessons from colonoscopy surveillance. Int J Cancer. 2021;148:800–11.
doi: 10.1002/ijc.33224
pubmed: 32683684
Perrod G, Rahmi G, Cellier C. Colorectal cancer screening in Lynch syndrome: indication, techniques and future perspectives. Dig Endosc. 2021;33:520–8.
doi: 10.1111/den.13702
pubmed: 32314431
Møller P, Seppälä TT, Bernstein I, et al. Cancer risk and survival in path_MMR carriers by gene and gender up to 75 years of age: a report from the prospective lynch syndrome database. Gut. 2018;67:1306–16.
doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314057
pubmed: 28754778
Møller P, Seppälä T, Bernstein I, et al. Incidence of and survival after subsequent cancers in carriers of pathogenic MMR variants with previous cancer: a report from the prospective Lynch syndrome database. Gut. 2017;66:1657–64.
doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2016-311403
pubmed: 27261338
Liljegren A, Barker G, Elliott F, et al. Prevalence of adenomas and hyperplastic polyps in mismatch repair mutation carriers among CAPP2 participants: report by the colorectal adenoma/carcinoma prevention program 2. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3434–9.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.13.2795
pubmed: 18612159
pmcid: 2645083
Staffa L, Echterdiek F, Nelius N, et al. Mismatch repair-deficient crypt foci in Lynch syndrome—molecular alterations and association with clinical parameters. PLoS ONE. 2015;10: e0121980.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121980
pubmed: 25816162
pmcid: 4376900
International Mismatch Repair Consortium. Variation in the risk of colorectal cancer in families with Lynch syndrome: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22:1014–22.
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00189-3
pmcid: 8934577
Chikatani K, Ishida H, Mori Y, et al. Risk of metachronous colorectal cancer after colectomy for first colon cancer in Lynch syndrome: multicenter retrospective study in Japan. Int J Clinical Oncol. 2023;28:1633–40.
doi: 10.1007/s10147-023-02412-z