-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Informing patients about their mutation tests: CDKN2A c.256G>A in melanoma as an example
K. Hemminki, A. Srivastava, S. Rachakonda, O. Bandapalli, E. Nagore, A. Hemminki, R. Kumar,
Jazyk angličtina Země Polsko
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
NLK
BioMedCentral
od 2003-01-12
BioMedCentral Open Access
od 2003
Directory of Open Access Journals
od 2003
Free Medical Journals
od 2003
PubMed Central
od 2003
Europe PubMed Central
od 2003
ProQuest Central
od 2003-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
od 2003-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
od 2003-01-01
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
od 2003-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
od 2003
Springer Nature OA/Free Journals
od 2003-12-01
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
Background: When germline mutations are suspected as causal in cancer, patient DNA may be sequenced to detect variants in relevant genes. If a particular mutation has not been reported in reliable family studies, genetic counselors are facing a dilemma of appropriately informing patients. Many sequencing facilities provide an interpretation of the findings based on the available sequence databases or on prediction tools that are curated from bioinformatics and mechanistic datasets. The counseling dilemma is exacerbated if the pedigree data are not informative but the in silico predictions suggest pathogenicity. Methods: We present here a real world example of the c.256G > A CDKN2A variant, which was detected in one melanoma patient where two siblings were diagnosed with melanoma in situ. We investigated a detailed family history of the affected siblings in order to survey probability of the cancer risks within the context to this mutation. Results: This c.256G > A CDKN2A variant was detected in one of the brothers and in the melanoma-free mother while the other brother in the family tested negative. The variant had been previously described in one patient from a melanoma family. In the family under investigation, the mother's 16 first-and second-degree relatives had survived past the median onset age for melanoma and none presented melanoma. We tested the variant using multiple bioinformatic tools that all predicted deleteriousness of the variant. The genetic counseling report to the melanoma patient stated that the CDKN2A variant was 'likely pathogenic' and the disease was defined as 'likely hereditary melanoma'. Conclusions: The pedigree data showed at the most a low penetrance variant, which, if taken into consideration, might have altered the provided diagnosis. When dealing with 'practically' unknown variants the counselors would be advised to incorporate a detailed family history rather than basing predictions on functionality provided by sequencing facilities.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc20021902
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20201204093219.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 201125s2020 pl f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1186/s13053-020-00146-x $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)32760473
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a pl
- 100 1_
- $a Hemminki, Kari $u Division of Molecular Genetic Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 580, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany. Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany. Faculty of Medicine and Biomedical Center in Pilsen, Charles University in Prague, 30605 Pilsen, Czech Republic.
- 245 10
- $a Informing patients about their mutation tests: CDKN2A c.256G>A in melanoma as an example / $c K. Hemminki, A. Srivastava, S. Rachakonda, O. Bandapalli, E. Nagore, A. Hemminki, R. Kumar,
- 520 9_
- $a Background: When germline mutations are suspected as causal in cancer, patient DNA may be sequenced to detect variants in relevant genes. If a particular mutation has not been reported in reliable family studies, genetic counselors are facing a dilemma of appropriately informing patients. Many sequencing facilities provide an interpretation of the findings based on the available sequence databases or on prediction tools that are curated from bioinformatics and mechanistic datasets. The counseling dilemma is exacerbated if the pedigree data are not informative but the in silico predictions suggest pathogenicity. Methods: We present here a real world example of the c.256G > A CDKN2A variant, which was detected in one melanoma patient where two siblings were diagnosed with melanoma in situ. We investigated a detailed family history of the affected siblings in order to survey probability of the cancer risks within the context to this mutation. Results: This c.256G > A CDKN2A variant was detected in one of the brothers and in the melanoma-free mother while the other brother in the family tested negative. The variant had been previously described in one patient from a melanoma family. In the family under investigation, the mother's 16 first-and second-degree relatives had survived past the median onset age for melanoma and none presented melanoma. We tested the variant using multiple bioinformatic tools that all predicted deleteriousness of the variant. The genetic counseling report to the melanoma patient stated that the CDKN2A variant was 'likely pathogenic' and the disease was defined as 'likely hereditary melanoma'. Conclusions: The pedigree data showed at the most a low penetrance variant, which, if taken into consideration, might have altered the provided diagnosis. When dealing with 'practically' unknown variants the counselors would be advised to incorporate a detailed family history rather than basing predictions on functionality provided by sequencing facilities.
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Srivastava, Aayushi $u Hopp Children's Cancer Center (KiTZ), Heidelberg, Germany. Division of Pediatric Neurooncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, Germany.
- 700 1_
- $a Rachakonda, Sivaramakrishna $u Division of Molecular Genetic Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 580, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany. Division of Functional Genome Analysis (B070), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
- 700 1_
- $a Bandapalli, Obul $u Hopp Children's Cancer Center (KiTZ), Heidelberg, Germany. Division of Pediatric Neurooncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, Germany.
- 700 1_
- $a Nagore, Eduardo $u Department of Dermatology, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, València, Spain. School of Medicine, Universidad Católica de Valencia San Vicente Mártir, València, Spain.
- 700 1_
- $a Hemminki, Akseli $u Cancer Gene Therapy Group, Translational Immunology Research Program, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. Comprehensive Cancer Center, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
- 700 1_
- $a Kumar, Rajiv $u Division of Molecular Genetic Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 580, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany. Division of Functional Genome Analysis (B070), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00175714 $t Hereditary cancer in clinical practice $x 1731-2302 $g Roč. 18, č. - (2020), s. 15
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32760473 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20201125 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20201204093217 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ind $b bmc $g 1591611 $s 1112574
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2020 $b 18 $c - $d 15 $e 20200731 $i 1731-2302 $m Hereditary cancer in clinical practice $n Hered Cancer Clin Pract $x MED00175714
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20201125