The prevalence of MADH4 and BMPR1A mutations in juvenile polyposis and absence of BMPR2, BMPR1B, and ACVR1 mutations.

BACKGROUND: Juvenile polyposis (JP) is an autosomal dominant syndrome predisposing to colorectal and gastric cancer. We have identified mutations in two genes causing JP, MADH4 and bone morphogenetic protein receptor 1A (BMPR1A): both are involved in bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) mediated signalling and are members of the TGF-beta superfamily. This study determined the prevalence of mutations in MADH4 and BMPR1A, as well as three other BMP/activin pathway candidate genes in a large number of JP patients. METHODS: DNA was extracted from the blood of JP patients and used for PCR amplification of each exon of these five genes, using primers flanking each intron-exon boundary. Mutations were determined by comparison to wild type sequences using sequence analysis software. A total of 77 JP cases were sequenced for mutations in the MADH4, BMPR1A, BMPR1B, BMPR2, and/or ACVR1 (activin A receptor) genes. The latter three genes were analysed when MADH4 and BMPR1A sequencing found no mutations. RESULTS: Germline MADH4 mutations were found in 14 cases (18.2%) and BMPR1A mutations in 16 cases (20.8%). No mutations were found in BMPR1B, BMPR2, or ACVR1 in 32 MADH4 and BMPR1A mutation negative cases. DISCUSSION: In the largest series of JP patients reported to date, the prevalence of germline MADH4 and BMPR1A mutations is approximately 20% for each gene. Since mutations were not found in more than half the JP patients, either additional genes predisposing to JP remain to be discovered, or alternate means of inactivation of the two known genes are responsible for these JP cases.

Carrier risk status changes resulting from mutation testing in hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer and hereditary breast-ovarian cancer.

CONTEXT: In hereditary cancer syndrome families with an identified cancer associated mutation, mutation testing changes the carrier risk status of the tested person and may change the carrier risk status of relatives. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the change in the distribution of carrier risk status resulting from testing in hereditary breast-ovarian cancer (HBOC) and hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) families. DESIGN: This was an observational cohort study. PATIENTS: The cohort included members of 75 HBOC and 47 HNPCC families. Of the 10 910 cohort members, 1408 were tested for a mutation and learned their test results. OUTCOME MEASURE: Carrier risk for all cohort members was assessed before and after mutation testing. RESULTS: There was a change in carrier risk status in 2906 subjects after testing of 1408 family members. The most common type of carrier risk change, from at risk to non-carrier status, accounted for 77% of the risk changes; 12% were a change to known carrier status from a lower risk. Sixty percent of persons with a carrier risk status change were not themselves tested; their risk status changed because of a relative's test result. CONCLUSIONS: Carrier risk status changes from uncertainty to certainty (that is, to carrier or to non-carrier) account for 89% of risk changes resulting from testing. These risk changes affect cancer prevention recommendations, most commonly reducing their burden. Current practices do not ensure that untested family members are informed about changes in their carrier risk status which result from mutation testing of their relatives.

Germline SMAD4 or BMPR1A mutations and phenotype of juvenile polyposis.

BACKGROUND: Juvenile polyposis (JP) is an inherited condition predisposing to upper gastrointestinal (UGI) polyps and colorectal cancer. Two genes are known to predispose to JP, SMAD4 and bone morphogenetic protein receptor type 1A (BMPR1A). The object of this study was to determine the differences in phenotype of patients with SMAD4 or BMPR1A mutations (MUT+) compared with those without (MUT-). METHODS: DNA was extracted from 54 JP probands and used for polymerase chain reaction of all exons of SMAD4 and BMPR1A. Products were then sequenced and analyzed for mutations. Medical record data were used to create a JP database, and statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact and unpaired t-tests. RESULTS: Nine of 54 patients had germline SMAD4 mutations, 13 had BMPR1A mutations, and 32 had neither. There were no significant differences between SMAD4+ and BMPR1A+ cases in terms of clinical factors examined, except for a family history of UGI involvement (P <.01). There was a higher prevalence of familial cases in MUT+ patients (P =.09), >10 lower gastrointestinal polyps (P =.06), and frequency of family history of gastrointestinal cancer compared with MUT- patients (P =.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with germline SMAD4 or BMPR1A mutations have a more prominent JP phenotype than those without, and SMAD4 mutations predispose to UGI polyposis.

Familial adenomatous polyposis and extracolonic cancer.

Our purpose is to focus attention on the cancer family history, coupled with an understanding of the natural history and extracolonic tumor spectrum of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), through a family study. This family report provides an example of how colorectal cancer (CRC) can be prevented by knowledgeable gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons who educate and compassionately counsel members of high-risk families so that their compliance with diagnostic screening and, ultimately, with protection through prophylactic colectomy, is achieved. A working pedigree of this extended family was constructed through interviews with the proband, followed by questionnaires sent to all primary and secondary relatives. Appropriately signed permission forms enabled us to secure pertinent medical and pathology records in order to ensure accuracy of historical information. Integral extracolonic tumors included medulloblastoma, papillary thyroid carcinoma, hepatoblastoma, and desmoid tumors. We conclude that, due in part to improved longevity as a result of being spared CRC, several family members have developed certain FAP integral extracolonic cancers.

Cancer genetics and nursing practice: what every gastroenterology nurse needs to know.

Most nurses will care for and provide health information about cancer to a patient at some point in their careers. Cancer care will change dramatically in the coming years as a result of the translation of information gained from the Human Genome Project into clinical practice and the enhanced understanding of cancer at a molecular level. A select group of cancers, known as hereditary cancers, result from mutations in the germline that confer a greatly increased lifetime risk of developing cancer. Advances in technology and discoveries stemming from the Human Genome Project now provide the means to test individuals for the presence of mutations associated with some known hereditary cancer syndromes. Of particular importance to gastroenterology nurses are hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes. Although many ethical, legal, and psychosocial issues associated with testing remain unresolved, predisposition genetic testing is having a significant impact on health care. Nurses will have vital roles in the future assessing patients and their family members for increased cancer risk, educating them about the availability of testing, making referrals for cancer genetic counseling and risk assessment, and providing follow-up care in the community for patients found to be at increased risk.

Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome II) in Uruguay.

PURPOSE: We updated an Uruguayan family with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer first described in 1977, incorporating knowledge of how the hMLH1 germline mutation has been established and shown to segregate in accord with the expected autosomal dominant mode of genetic transmission. METHODS: DNA-based molecular genetic testing was performed in conjunction with genetic counseling. Individuals were provided with their genetic test results, so that at-risk family members would be able to benefit from targeted management programs. RESULTS: We counseled 19 members of this kindred, 13 of whom were positive for the hMLH1 germline mutation. Specific recommendations for surveillance and management were provided. We were able to describe follow-up, including anecdotal cancer survival and pathology findings extending from the initial 1977 report of this family to the present. A remarkable sibship within this kindred was comprised of eight siblings, six of whom underwent resections for colorectal carcinoma between 1963 and 1971. Colon carcinomas before 1977 in this sibship were treated with classic hemicolectomies. Of those who had hemicolectomies for their first primary colorectal cancers, two had a second colon cancer primary, and two had a third colon cancer primary. CONCLUSIONS: Attention given to this extended family with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer has had a positive impact on the physician community in Uruguay, leading to the identification of additional families with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer.

Clinical impact of molecular genetic diagnosis, genetic counseling, and management of hereditary cancer. Part II: Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal carcinoma as a model.

Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal carcinoma (HNPCC) is the most common hereditary form of colorectal carcinoma (CRC) and may account for 5-10% of the total CRC burden. The discovery of DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes, inclusive of hMSH2, hMLH1, hPMS2, and hMSH6, has enabled the identification of who has and who does not have inordinately increased susceptibility to CRC as well as a litany of extracolonic cancers. Mutation testing has focused on hMSH2 and hMLH1, the most common mutations in HNPCC. The protocol for DNA testing and DNA-based genetic counseling is described in Part I of this study. One hundred ninety-nine bloodline relatives were tested and counseled from five hMLH1 and two hMSH2 families. Their major reason for seeking genetic counseling and DNA testing was to inform their children and other loved ones of their mutation status. Those who sought counseling overestimated their risk for inheriting the mutation and showed a high rate of interest in prophylactic surgery, and many were greatly concerned about insurance discrimination. Knowledge about HNPCC, its molecular genetic diagnosis, surveillance and management opportunities, and genetic counseling implications are still emerging, all in the face of a greater need for physician education regarding all facets of hereditary cancer.

Clinical impact of molecular genetic diagnosis, genetic counseling, and management of hereditary cancer. Part I: Studies of cancer in families.

Hereditary cancer represents approximately 5-10% of the total cancer burden and may account for 60,000 to 120,000 new cancer occurrences this year in the United States. New developments in molecular genetics and the cloning of cancer-prone genes have intensely fueled interest in dealing with hereditary forms of cancer. The authors provide an algorithm that depicts the process for the identification, study, and DNA-based genetic counseling of families being investigated under a research proposal at the Hereditary Cancer Institute of Creighton University School of Medicine. They have studied 56 hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal carcinoma families; in 18 of them, associated genomic mutations have been identified in affected members. DNA-based genetic counseling has been provided for seven of these families. The authors have also evaluated 131 hereditary breast-ovarian carcinoma families. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation searches have been performed for 76 of these families; BRCA1 mutations were found in 38 families and BRCA2 mutations in 9. The study of cancer-prone families is a powerful approach to cancer control, particularly when the germ-line mutation is identified in the family and individuals at high risk can be tested, once they provide informed consent, and receive DNA-based genetic counseling. Discovery of the germ-line mutation for cancer proneness provides an unparalleled opportunity to predict patients' life-time risk for cancer of specific anatomic sites, inclusive of a pattern of multiple primaries. Surveillance and management protocols, when melded to the particular syndrome's natural history, can be life-saving.

Integration of family history and medical management of patients with hereditary cancers.

The family histories of individuals affected by a wide variety of cancers have provided information about the principal features of hereditary cancer. Surveillance protocols, indicating the most appropriate modalities and the age at which to initiate them, have been derived from what has been learned about the age of onset and the cancer sites associated with specific cancer syndromes. Likewise, cancer management has been based on what is known of the natural history of the syndrome cancers from studying multiple affected families. Family history has even been an essential tool for molecular geneticists as they have mapped and eventually identified genes for such cancer syndromes as hereditary breast ovarian carcinoma (HBOC), familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), and hereditary nonpolyposis colon carcinoma (HNPCC). Despite the rapid integration of molecular genetics into the diagnosis and management of individuals at high risk for hereditary cancer, family history remains an essential tool in all aspects of cancer genetic health services. Recognition of a hereditary cancer syndrome through a family's history offers a primary care provider an opportunity to intervene on behalf of not just one patient but an entire family. Once hereditary cancer is identified, the information that has been learned and the protocols developed from numerous family histories can be applied to one individual or family based on their specific family history.

Medical genetic evaluation for the etiology of hearing loss in children.

The purpose of the medical genetic evaluation is to identify the etiology of the hearing loss. To do so requires a multidisciplinary team that includes the otolaryngologist, audiologist, medical geneticist, and radiologist. A number of tests and procedures are now available to assist in the search for the cause of hearing losses. The importance of sensitivity when providing genetic counseling is emphasized. Molecular genetics offers potential for continued progress in understanding the etiologies of hearing loss. Recent advances in this area are discussed.

Genetics in the OR--implications for perioperative nursing practice.

New developments in deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) technology are increasing understanding of the role of genetics in health and disease. This kind of health information requires that perioperative nurses develop new skills and roles that will enhance the quality of genetic health care they provide to patients, particularly with regard to managing genetic information. Perioperative nurses expand their scope of practice to incorporate a genetic focus into health assessment, patient education, and patient support as they assimilate new genetic information into their daily lives. Perioperative nurses familiar with genetic counseling services--and how and when to refer patients for such services--will ensure that all patients have access to the most current and appropriate genetic information with which to make informed health choices.

A descriptive study of BRCA1 testing and reactions to disclosure of test results.

BACKGROUND: The identification of the BRCA1 gene is a powerful tool for predicting a patient's lifetime risk for carcinoma of the breast and ovary when she has hereditary breast/ovarian carcinoma (HBOC) syndrome. The process of BRCA1 testing and genetic counseling and participants' reactions to test results, are described. METHODS: Education about the natural history of HBOC syndrome and the pros and cons of genetic testing was provided to 14 HBOC families comprised of 2549 bloodline relatives. Of these, 388 underwent DNA testing. After informed consent was given by participants, formal linkage analysis and gene mutation studies were performed on the families. Qualitative data on intentions and emotional reactions were collected by physicians/counselors during the genetic counseling sessions. RESULTS: Of those tested, 181 received their results after further genetic counseling. Seventy-eight of them were positive and 100 were negative for BRCA1 gene mutation. Three had ambiguous findings. The most common reasons given for seeking DNA testing were concern about risk to children and concern about surveillance and prevention. Prophylactic mastectomy was considered by 35% of women who tested positive, whereas prophylactic oophorectomy was considered an important option by 76%. Twenty-five percent of both BRCA1 positive and negative individuals were concerned about discrimination by insurance companies. Eighty percent of those who tested negative reported emotional relief, whereas over one-third of those who tested positive reported sadness, anger, or guilt. CONCLUSIONS: DNA testing of patients with HBOC syndrome must be performed in the context of genetic counseling. The authors' results demonstrate the many complex clinical and nonclinical issues that are important in this process.

Nursing and genetic health care.

Advances in DNA technology are leading to major developments in nursing practice in clinical genetics, including the creation of new roles for nurses who care for people with genetic conditions. Application of genetic information and testing is moving genetics into the mainstream of health care. Therefore, it is anticipated that nurses in all areas of practice will become involved in the provision of information about genetic testing and assisting individuals and families in decision making and adjustment to new genetic information. This article provides an overview of the profession of nursing which may be useful to genetic counselors in the development of collaborative relationships between the two professions.