Molecular analysis distinguishes metastatic disease from second cancers in patients with retinoblastoma.

The pediatric ocular tumor retinoblastoma readily metastasizes, but these lesions can masquerade as histologically similar pediatric small round blue cell tumors. Since 98% of retinoblastomas have RB1 mutations and a characteristic genomic copy number "signature", genetic analysis is an appealing adjunct to histopathology to distinguish retinoblastoma metastasis from second primary cancer in retinoblastoma patients. Here, we describe such an approach in two retinoblastoma cases. In patient one, allele-specific (AS)-PCR for a somatic nonsense mutation confirmed that a temple mass was metastatic retinoblastoma. In a second patient, a rib mass shared somatic copy number gains and losses with the primary tumor. For definitive diagnosis, however, an RB1 mutation was needed, but heterozygous promoter→exon 11 deletion was the only RB1 mutation detected in the primary tumor. We used a novel application of inverse PCR to identify the deletion breakpoint. Subsequently, AS-PCR designed for the breakpoint confirmed that the rib mass was metastatic retinoblastoma. These cases demonstrate that personalized molecular testing can confirm retinoblastoma metastases and rule out a second primary cancer, thereby helping to direct the clinical management.

Identification of clinically relevant mosaicism in type I hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) is an autosomal dominant genetic disorder affecting the vascular system, characterised by epistaxis, arteriovenous malformations and mucocutaneous and gastrointestinal telangiectases. Mutations in two genes, ENG and ACVRL1, account for the majority of cases. Almost all cases of HHT show a family history of HHT-associated symptoms; few cases are de novo. Mutational mosaicism is the presence of two populations of cells, with both mutant and normal genotypes in one individual and generally occurs through de novo mutation events in embryogenesis. Some isolated cases of HHT with no detectable ENG or ACVRL1 mutation may be caused by a mosaic ENG or ACVRL1 mutation that is present at levels below the limit of detection of current molecular screening methods. OBJECTIVE: To identify clinically relevant mosaicism in type I HHT. METHODS: Sequencing, quantitative multiplex-PCR and marker analysis were used to identify three HHT families with founders who showed mosaicism for endoglin mutations. Where available, mosaicism was verified by testing different sampling sites, including blood, hair and buccal swabs. RESULTS: All three mosaic samples exhibited the mutation in an estimated ≤ 25% of the DNA. Two of the mosaic patients had clinically confirmed HHT by the Curaçao criteria and the other showed symptoms of HHT. In each case the heterozygous mutation had already been identified in another family member before detection in the mosaic founder. CONCLUSIONS: The results show the importance of investigating patients without prior family history for the presence of mutational mosaicism, as detecting this would enable appropriate genetic screening and targeted medical care for at-risk children of mosaic patients.

Detection of mosaic RB1 mutations in families with retinoblastoma.

The RB1 gene mutation detection rate in 1,020 retinoblastoma families was increased by the use of highly sensitive allele specific-PCR (AS-PCR) to detect low-level mosaicism for 11 recurrent RB1 CGA>TGA nonsense mutations. For bilaterally affected probands, AS-PCR increased the RB1 mutation detection sensitivity from 92.6% to 94.8%. Both RB1 oncogenic changes were detected in 92.7% of sporadic unilateral tumors (357/385); 14.6% (52/357) of unilateral probands with both tumor mutations identified carried one of the tumor mutations in blood. Mosaicism was evident in 5.5% of bilateral probands (23 of 421), in 3.8% of unilateral probands (22 of 572), and in one unaffected mother of a unilateral proband. Half of the mosaic mutations were only detectable by AS-PCR for the 11 recurrent CGA>TGA mutations, and not by standard sequencing. This suggests that significant numbers of low-level mosaics with other classes of RB1 mutations remain unidentified by current technology. We show that the use of linkage analysis in a two-generation retinoblastoma family resulted in the erroneous conclusion that a child carried the parental mutation, because the founder parent was mosaic for the RB1 mutation. Of 142 unaffected parental pairs tested, only one unaffected parent of a proband (0.7%) showed somatic mosaicism for the proband's mutation, in contrast to an overall 4.5% somatic mosaicism rate for retinoblastoma probands, suggesting that mosaicism for an RB1 mutation is highly likely to manifest as retinoblastoma.

Loss of RB1 induces non-proliferative retinoma: increasing genomic instability correlates with progression to retinoblastoma.

Retinoblastoma clinical observations revealed the role of tumor suppressor genes in human cancer, Knudson's 'two-hit' model of cancer induction. We now demonstrate that loss of both RB1 tumor suppressor gene alleles initiates quiescent RB1(-/-) retinomas with low level genomic instability and high expression of the senescence-associated proteins p16(INK4a) and p130. Although retinomas can remain unchanged throughout life, highly proliferative, clonal and aneuploid retinoblastomas commonly emerge, exhibiting altered gene copy number and expression of oncogenes (MYCN, E2F3, DEK, KIF14 and MDM4) and tumor suppressor genes (CDH11, p75(NTR)) and reduced expression of p16(INK4a) and p130. We suggest that RB1 inactivation in developing retina induces genomic instability, but senescence can block transformation at the stage of retinoma. However, stable retinoma is rarely clinically observed because progressive genomic instability commonly leads to highly proliferative retinoblastoma.