A substantial number of hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) and colonic polyposis cannot be explained by alteration in confirmed predisposition genes, such as mismatch repair (MMR) genes, APC and MUTYH. Recently, a certain number of potential predisposition genes have been suggested, involving each a small number of cases reported so far. Here, we describe the detection of rare variants in the NTLH1, AXIN2, RNF43, BUB1, and TP53 genes in nine unrelated patients who were suspected for inherited CRC and/or colonic polyposis. Seven of them were classified as pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PV/LPV). Clinical manifestations of carriers were largely consistent with reported cases with, nevertheless, distinct characteristics. PV/LPV in these uncommon gene can be responsible for up to 2.7% of inherited CRC or colonic polyposis syndromes. Our findings provide supporting evidence for the role of these genes in cancer predisposition, and contribute to the determination of related cancer spectrum and cancer risk for carriers, allowing for the establishment of appropriate screening strategy and genetic counseling in affected families.

OBJECTIVE: Germline BRCA1-2 test is routinely recommended in Pancreatic Cancer (PC) patients, due to its clinical-epidemiological relevance. Data on the prevalence of germline pathogenic variants (gPV) in other cancer predisposition and DNA Damage Repair (DDR) system-related genes in unselected PC cases are sparce in Italy. We assessed this prevalence in a multicentre cohort, to derive recommendations for PC patients.
METHODS: Clinical data of 1200 consecutive PC patients, of any age and stage, tested with a multigene germline panel were collected. A descriptive analysis of gPV frequency and clinical variables was performed both in 1092 patients tested for an 18 genes core-panel (CP-18 cohort) and in 869 patients screened only for CDKN2A.
RESULTS: 11.5 % (126/1092) of CP-18 cohort patients harbored a gPV in ≥ 1 gene. Highest gPV frequencies were detected in ATM (3.1 %), BRCA2 (2.9 %), BRCA1 (1.6 %), CHEK2 (1.1 %). Patients harboring any CP-18 gene and BRCA1-2 gPV were younger and with a higher rate of personal (PH) or family history (FH) of cancer when compared to no gPV patients. The risk of having a gPV was ≥ 7 % in all subgroups of patients, including those aged > 73, with tumor stage I-III and negative FH/PH. CDKN2A gPV were detected in 2.6 % (23/869) of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: A remarkable prevalence of gPV in cancer predisposition and DDR genes is reported in this large multicentre cohort of consecutive and unselected PC patients. Therefore, we recommend multigene germline testing (at least including BRCA1-2, ATM, CDKN2A, PALB2) for all PC patients, irrespective of age, stage, PH/FH.

BACKGROUND: Germline genetic testing is traditionally carried out in patients suspected with hereditary cancer syndrome for enhanced cancer surveillance and/or preventive strategies, but is increasingly carried out for therapeutic indications.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent germline genetic testing at our centre to determine the prevalence of actionable pathogenic germline variants (PGV) and their clinical utility.
RESULTS: From 2000 to 2022, 1154 cancer patients underwent germline testing, with the majority (945/1154) tested with multi-gene panels. Four hundred and eleven (35.6%) patients harboured a PGV and 334 (81%) were clinically actionable. BRCA1/2 accounted for 62.3% of actionable mutations, followed by mismatch repair (18%), and other homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes (19.7%). One hundred and fifty-two germline-positive patients have advanced cancers, and 79 received germline-directed therapies (poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors = 75; immunotherapy = 4). Median duration of immunotherapy and poly ADP ribose polymerase were 20.5 months (range 5-40 months) and 8 months (range 1-76 months), respectively. Among BRCA/HRR mutation carriers who received platinum-based chemotherapy, pathological complete response rate in the neoadjuvant setting was 53% (n = 17 breast cancers) and objective response rate was >80% in the advanced setting (n = 71).
CONCLUSIONS: One-third of cancer patients tested carried a PGV and ∼80% were clinically actionable. Three-quarters of germline-positive advanced cancer patients received germline-directed therapies in the real world, underscoring the practical utility of germline testing to guide cancer therapeutics.

Multiple primary tumors (MPTs) are a harbinger of hereditary cancer syndromes. Affected individuals often fit genetic testing criteria for a number of hereditary cancer genes and undergo multigene panel testing. Other genomic testing options, such as whole exome (WES) and whole genome sequencing (WGS) are available, but the utility of these genomic approaches as a second-tier test for those with uninformative multigene panel testing has not been explored. Here, we report our germline sequencing results from WGS in 9 patients with MPTs who had non-informative multigene panel testing. Following germline WGS, sequence (agnostic or 735 selected genes) and copy number variant (CNV) analysis was performed according to the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) standards and guidelines for interpreting sequence variants and reporting CNVs. In this cohort, WGS, as a second-tier test, did not identify additional pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes. Although we identified a CHEK2 likely pathogenic variant and a MUTYH pathogenic variant, both were previously identified in the multigene panels and were not explanatory for the presented type of tumors. CNV analysis also failed to identify any pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes. In summary, after multigene panel testing, WGS did not reveal any additional pathogenic variants in patients with MPTs. Our study, based on a small cohort of patients with MPT, suggests that germline gene panel testing may be sufficient to investigate these cases. Future studies with larger sample sizes may further elucidate the additional utility of WGS in MPTs.

Hereditary cancer predisposition syndromes are caused by germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes (CPG). The majority of pathogenic variants in CPGs are point mutations, but large gene rearrangements (LGRs) are present in several CPGs. LGRs can be much more difficult to characterize and perhaps they may have been neglected in molecular diagnoses.
We aimed to evaluate the frequencies of germline LGRs in studies conducted in different populations worldwide through a qualitative systematic review based on an online literature research in PubMed. Two reviewers independently extracted data from published studies between 2009 and 2020. In total, 126 studies from 37 countries and 5 continents were included in the analysis. The number of studies in different continents ranged from 3 to 48 and for several countries there was an absolute lack of information. Asia and Europe represented most of the studies, and LGR frequencies varied from 3.04 to 15.06% in different continents. MLPA was one of the methods of choice in most studies (93%).
The LGR frequencies found in this review reinforce the need for comprehensive molecular testing regardless of the population of origin and should be considered by genetic counseling providers.

Progresses over the past years have extensively improved our capacity to use genome-scale analyses-including high-density genotyping and exome and genome sequencing-to identify the genetic basis of pediatric tumors. In particular, exome sequencing has contributed to the evidence that about 10% of children and adolescents with tumors have germline genetic variants associated with cancer predisposition. In this review, we provide an overview of genetic variations predisposing to solid pediatric tumors (medulloblastoma, ependymoma, astrocytoma, neuroblastoma, retinoblastoma, Wilms tumor, osteosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, and Ewing sarcoma) and outline the biological processes affected by the involved mutated genes. A careful description of the genetic basis underlying a large number of syndromes associated with an increased risk of pediatric cancer is also reported. We place particular emphasis on the emerging view that interactions between germline and somatic alterations are a key determinant of cancer development. We propose future research directions, which focus on the biological function of pediatric risk alleles and on the potential links between the germline genome and somatic changes. Finally, the importance of developing new molecular diagnostic tests including all the identified risk germline mutations and of considering the genetic predisposition in screening tests and novel therapies is emphasized.

BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence indicates inherited risk in the aetiology of lung cancer, although smoking exposure is the major attributing factor. Family history is a simple substitute for inherited susceptibility. Previous studies have shown some possible yet conflicting links between family history of cancer and EGFR mutation in lung cancer. As EGFR-mutated lung cancer favours female, never-smoker, adenocarcinoma and Asians, it may be argued that there may be some underlying genetic modifiers responsible for the pathogenesis of EGFR mutation.
METHODS: We searched four databases for all original articles on family history of malignancy and EGFR mutation status in lung cancer published up to July 2018. We performed a meta-analysis by using a random-effects model and odds ratio estimates. Heterogeneity and sensitivity were also investigated. Then we conducted a second literature research to curate case reports of familial lung cancers who studied both germline cancer predisposing genes and their somatic EGFR mutation status; and explored the possible links between cancer predisposing genes and EGFR mutation.
RESULTS: Eleven studies have been included in the meta-analysis. There is a significantly higher likelihood of EGFR mutation in lung cancer patients with family history of cancer than their counterparts without family history, preferentially in Asians (OR = 1.35[1.06-1.71], P = 0.01), those diagnosed with adenocarcinomas ((OR = 1.47[1.14-1.89], P = 0.003) and those with lung cancer-affected relatives (first and second-degree: OR = 1.53[1.18-1.99], P = 0.001; first-degree: OR = 1.76[1.36-2.28, P < 0.0001]). Familial lung cancers more likely have concurrent EGFR mutations along with mutations in their germline cancer predisposition genes including EGFR T790 M, BRCA2 and TP53. Certain mechanisms may contribute to the combination preferences between inherited mutations and somatic ones.
CONCLUSIONS: Potential genetic modifiers may contribute to somatic EGFR mutation in lung cancer, although current data is limited. Further studies on this topic are needed, which may help to unveil lung carcinogenesis pathways. However, caution is warranted in data interpretation due to limited cases available for the current study.

Two core polyadenylation elements (CPE) located in the 3\' untranslated region of eukaryotic pre-mRNAs play an essential role in their processing: the polyadenylation signal (PAS) AAUAAA and the cleavage site (CS), preferentially a CA dinucleotide. Herein, we characterized PAS and CS sequences in a set of cancer predisposition genes (CPGs) and performed an in silico investigation of microRNAs (miRNAs) regulation to identify potential tumor-suppressive and oncogenic miRNAs. NCBI and alternative polyadenylation databases were queried to characterize CPE sequences in 117 CPGs, including 81 and 17 known tumor suppressor genes and oncogenes, respectively. miRNA-mediated regulation analysis was performed using predicted and validated data sources. Based on NCBI analyses, we did not find an established PAS in 21 CPGs, and verified that the majority of PAS already described (74.4%) had the canonical sequence AAUAAA. Interestingly, \"AA\" dinucleotide was the most common CS (37.5%) associated with this set of genes. Approximately 90% of CPGs exhibited evidence of alternative polyadenylation (more than one functional PAS). Finally, the mir-192 family was significantly overrepresented as regulator of tumor suppressor genes (P < 0.01), which suggests a potential oncogenic function. Overall, this study provides a landscape of CPE in CPGs, which might be useful in development of future molecular analyses covering these frequently neglected regulatory sequences.

Germline mutations occurring in the highly penetrant genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 are responsible for only certain cases of familial breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC). Thus, the use of NGS multi-gene panel (MGP) testing has recently become very popular.
To estimate a reliable BC and OC risk associated with pathogenic variants in the selected candidate BC/OC predisposition genes, a comprehensive meta-analysis of 48 MGP-based studies analyzing BC/OC patients was conducted. The role of 37 genes was evaluated, comparing, in total, the mutation frequency in ~120,000 BC/OC cases and ~120,000 controls, which guaranteed strong statistical support with high confidence for most analyzed genes.
We characterized the strategies of MGP analyses and the types and localizations of the identified mutations and showed that 13 and 11 of the analyzed genes were significantly associated with an increased BC and OC risk, respectively. The risk attributed to some of these genes (e.g., CDKN2A and PALB2 for BC) was similar to that observed for BRCA2. The analysis also showed a substantial difference in the profile of genes contributing to either BC or OC risk, including genes specifically associated with a high risk of OC but not BC (e.g., RAD51C, and RAD51D).
Our study provides strong statistical proof, defines the risk for many genes often considered candidates for BC/OC predisposition and excludes the role of other genes frequently analyzed in the MGPs. In the context of clinical diagnostics, the results support the knowledge-based interpretation of identified mutations.

Pathogenic variants in known breast cancer (BC) predisposing genes explain only about 30% of Hereditary Breast Cancer (HBC) cases, whereas the underlying genetic factors for most families remain unknown. Here, we used whole-exome sequencing (WES) to identify genetic variants associated to HBC in 17 patients of Brazil with familial BC and negative for causal variants in major BC risk genes (BRCA1/2, TP53, and CHEK2 c.1100delC). First, we searched for rare variants in 27 known HBC genes and identified two patients harboring truncating pathogenic variants in ATM and BARD1. For the remaining 15 negative patients, we found a substantial vast number of rare genetic variants. Thus, for selecting the most promising variants we used functional-based variant prioritization, followed by NGS validation, analysis in a control group, cosegregation analysis in one family and comparison with previous WES studies, shrinking our list to 23 novel BC candidate genes, which were evaluated in an independent cohort of 42 high-risk BC patients. Rare and possibly damaging variants were identified in 12 candidate genes in this cohort, including variants in DNA repair genes (ERCC1 and SXL4) and other cancer-related genes (NOTCH2, ERBB2, MST1R, and RAF1). Overall, this is the first WES study applied for identifying novel genes associated to HBC in Brazilian patients, in which we provide a set of putative BC predisposing genes. We also underpin the value of using WES for assessing the complex landscape of HBC susceptibility, especially in less characterized populations.