Comparison of the ABC and ACMG systems for variant classification.

The ABC and ACMG variant classification systems were compared by asking mainly European clinical laboratories to classify variants in 10 challenging cases using both systems, and to state if the variant in question would be reported as a relevant result or not as a measure of clinical utility. In contrast to the ABC system, the ACMG system was not made to guide variant reporting but to determine the likelihood of pathogenicity. Nevertheless, this comparison is justified since the ACMG class determines variant reporting in many laboratories. Forty-three laboratories participated in the survey. In seven cases, the classification system used did not influence the reporting likelihood when variants labeled as "maybe report" after ACMG-based classification were included. In three cases of population frequent but disease-associated variants, there was a difference in favor of reporting after ABC classification. A possible reason is that ABC step C (standard variant comments) allows a variant to be reported in one clinical setting but not another, e.g., based on Bayesian-based likelihood calculation of clinical relevance. Finally, the selection of ACMG criteria was compared between 36 laboratories. When excluding criteria used by less than four laboratories (<10%), the average concordance rate was 46%. Taken together, ABC-based classification is more clear-cut than ACMG-based classification since molecular and clinical information is handled separately, and variant reporting can be adapted to the clinical question and phenotype. Furthermore, variants do not get a clinically inappropriate label, like pathogenic when not pathogenic in a clinical context, or variant of unknown significance when the significance is known.

Update on Hereditary Colorectal Cancer: Improving the Clinical Utility of Multigene Panel Testing.

Colorectal cancer (CRC), one of the most common cancers, is a major public health issue globally, especially in Westernized countries. Up to 35% of CRCs are thought to be due to heritable factors, but currently only 5% to 10% of CRCs are attributable to high-risk mutations in known CRC susceptibility genes, predominantly the mismatch repair genes (Lynch syndrome) and adenomatous polyposis coli gene (APC; familial adenomatous polyposis). In this era of precision medicine, high-risk mutation carriers, when identified, can be offered various risk management options that prevent cancers and improve survival, including risk-reducing medication, screening for early detection, and surgery. The practice of clinical genetics is currently transitioning from phenotype-directed single gene testing to multigene panels, now offered by numerous providers. For CRC, the genes included across these panels vary, ranging from well established, clinically actionable susceptibility genes with quantified magnitude of risk, to genes that lack extensive validation or have less evidence of association with CRC and, therefore, have minimal clinical utility. The current lack of consensus regarding inclusion of genes in CRC panels presents challenges in patient counseling and management, particularly when a variant in a less validated gene is identified. Furthermore, there remain considerable challenges regarding variant interpretation even for the well established CRC susceptibility genes. Ironically though, only through more widespread testing and the accumulation of large international data sets will sufficient information be generated to (i) enable well powered studies to determine if a gene is associated with CRC susceptibility, (ii) to develop better models for variant interpretation and (iii) to facilitate clinical translation.

Somatic mutations of the coding microsatellites within the beta-2-microglobulin gene in mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancers and adenomas.

In colorectal cancers (CRCs) with tumour mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency, genes involved in the host immune response that contain microsatellites in their coding regions, including beta-2-microglobulin (B2M), can acquire mutations that may alter the immune response, tumour progression and prognosis. We screened the coding microsatellites within B2M for somatic mutations in MMR-deficient CRCs and adenomas to determine associations with tumour subtypes, clinicopathological features and survival. Incident MMR-deficient CRCs from Australasian Colorectal Cancer Family Registry (ACCFR) and the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study participants (n = 144) and 63 adenomas from 41 MMR gene mutation carriers from the ACCFR were screened for somatic mutations within five coding microsatellites of B2M. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall survival by B2M mutation status were estimated using Cox regression, adjusting for age at CRC diagnosis, sex, AJCC stage and grade. B2M mutations occurred in 30 (20.8%) of the 144 MMR-deficient CRCs (29% of the MLH1-methylated, 17% of the Lynch syndrome and 9% of the suspected Lynch CRCs). No B2M mutations were identified in the 63 adenomas tested. B2M mutations differed by site, stage, grade and lymphocytic infiltration although none reached statistical significance (p > 0.05). The HR for overall survival for B2M mutated CRC was 0.65 (95% CI 0.29-1.48) compared with B2M wild-type. We observed differences in B2M mutation status in MMR-deficient CRC by tumour subtypes, site, stage, grade, immune infiltrate and for overall survival that warrant further investigation in larger studies before B2M mutation status can be considered to have clinical utility.