Abstract
The most prevalent type of intestinal polyposis, colorectal adenomatous polyposis (CAP), is regarded as a precancerous lesion of colorectal cancer with obvious genetic characteristics. Early screening and intervention can significantly improve patients’ survival and prognosis. The adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) mutation is believed to be the primary cause of CAP. There is, however, a subset of CAP with undetectable pathogenic mutations in APC, known as APC (-)/CAP. The genetic predisposition to APC (-)/CAP has largely been associated with germline mutations in some susceptible genes, including the human mutY homologue (MUTYH) gene and the Nth-like DNA glycosylase 1 (NTHL1) gene, and DNA mismatch repair (MMR) can cause autosomal recessive APC (-)/CAP. Furthermore, autosomal dominant APC (-)/CAP could occur as a result of DNA polymerase epsilon (POLE)/DNA polymerase delta 1 (POLD1), axis inhibition protein 2 (AXIN2), and dual oxidase 2 (DUOX2) mutations. The clinical phenotypes of these pathogenic mutations vary greatly depending on their genetic characteristics. Therefore, in this study, we present a comprehensive review of the association between autosomal recessive and dominant APC (-)/CAP genotypes and clinical phenotypes and conclude that APC (-)/CAP is a disease caused by multiple genes with different phenotypes and interaction exists in the pathogenic genes.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Colorectal adenomatous polyposis (CAP) is a common intestinal polyposis and a precancerous lesion associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) [1]. Since Crisp described the first case of CAP in 1882 [2], it has attracted widespread attention. Then, in the 1980s, adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) was discovered as a susceptibility gene for CAP with a clear familial aggregation, and this type of CAP was named familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) [3]. In subsequent studies, researchers detected no pathogenic mutations of APC in cases of CAP and explained these CAPs with other susceptibility genes. With advances in our understanding of CAP, researchers globally have proposed that CAP is used as an umbrella term, with FAP considered a subtype of CAP [4]. APC mutation-negative CAP was defined as APC (-)/CAP.
To date, the reported APC(-)/CAP include autosomal recessive MUTYH-associated CAP (MAP) [5], NTHL1-associated CAP (NAP) [6], CAP caused by constitutional mismatch repair deficiency syndrome (CMMRD) [7], autosomal dominant polymerase proofreading genes POLE/POLD1-associated CAP (PPAP) [8], AXIN2-associated CAP (AAP) [9], and DUOX2-associated CAP (DAP) [10] (Fig. 1).
The clinical phenotypes of autosomal recessive APC (-)/CAP in MAP, NAP, and CMMRD differ, as do the clinical phenotypes of autosomal dominant PPAP, AAP, and DAP. The clinical phenotype differences of APC (-)/CAP could be attributed to different genetic mutations. However, few reports have summarized this aspect. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the association between pathogenic genes causing autosomal recessive and dominant CAP and clinical phenotypes with APC mutation-negative CAP.
Autosomal Recessive APC (-)/CAP
MUTYH-Associated Polyposis (MAP)
Discovery of MAP
MAP is an autosomal recessive disease caused by biallelic germline mutations in MUTYH [11]. MUTYH, also known as MYH, is a gene that encodes a glycosylase involved in DNA base excision repair (BER), which plays a key role in cellular defense against oxidative damage. The MUTYH protein excises adenine in the nascent strand opposite 8-oxo-G in template DNA and restores G:C base-repair to maintain DNA replication fidelity [12]. AI-Tassan et al. first reported that the germline mutation in MUTYH caused APC (-)/CAP [5]. Farrington et al. further confirmed that MUTYH is the driving gene for some APC(-)/CAP, which is associated with BER defects and is therefore named MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP) [13]. This is the first time a new susceptibility gene for CAP was identified since the discovery of APC, and MUTYH is the first APC (-)/CAP susceptibility gene of BER to be validated.
Genetic Background of MAP
It is estimated that the MUTYH mutation accounts for 20% of APC(-)/CAP. MUTYH mutations are the most common in APC(-)/CAP [10]. According to the Catalogue Of Somatic Mutations In Cancer (COSMIC) database, missense mutations in MUTYH account for 53.49%, nonsense mutations for 3.49%, and synonymous mutations for 12.79% of APC (-)/CAP in colorectal tissues (Fig. 2). Y179C and G396D are the two most common pathogenic mutations in MUTYH in the Northwestern European MAP population [14, 15], with the Y179C mutation being a high-risk factor for adenoma and is associated with its aggressiveness [16, 17]. Mutations in MAP are often characterized by G:C > T:A transversions due to the dysfunctional MUTYH in the BER pathway [18]. In European populations, the majority of pathogenic mutations are found in the exon 7 region of MUTYH, which is presumed to be the mutation cluster region (MCR) of MUTYH. However, very few mutations in exon 7 were detected in the MAP mutation profile in patients from Asian countries, such as China, Japan, and Korea [15, 19,20,21]. A comprehensive analysis of several ethnicities also demonstrates the difference in MCR of MUTYH mutations between ethnicities [22].
Clinical Implications of MAP
The clinical phenotype of MAP is similar to that of attenuated FAP (AFAP). The number of intestinal polyps is often less than 100, and it is prevalent in the left hemicolon (71%). The risk of CRC from MAP is high, and CRC caused by MAP is usually diagnosed around the age of 50, with a good prognosis [23,24,25,26]. Owing to the similarities in the clinical phenotypes, only genetic testing can distinguish the mutational features between MAP and AFAP. Further, MUTYH acts as a multiple-effect gene. Mutations in MUTYH cause widespread multiorgan and multisystem lesions [24]. Many studies have linked MAP extraintestinal lesions to ovarian, bladder, breast, thyroid, duodenal, sebaceous gland, skin, and endometrial cancers [24,25,26,27,28,29], the most of which are ovarian and bladder cancers [24, 28]. Therefore, for MAP patients, ovarian and bladder lesions should be routinely screened.
NTHL1-Associated Polyposis (NAP)
Discovery of NAP
NTHL1-associated polyposis is an autosomal recessive disease caused by biallelic germline mutations in NTHL1 [30]. Similar to MUTYH, NTHL1 encodes a DNA glycosylase and participates in the BER pathway. NTHL1 mutations increase the risk of colorectal adenomas [31, 32]. In 2015, Weren et al. first reported the pathogenic mutation in NTHL1 associated with CAP [6]. Further studies confirmed that NTHL1 is a potential susceptibility gene for APC (-)/CAP and then Kuiper et al. named it NTHL1-associated polyposis (NAP) [30, 33, 34]. After the BER gene MUTYH, NTHL1 is secondly identified and demonstrated to cause BER abnormalities, which are involved in the occurrence of CAP.
Genetic Background of NAP
The Q90X mutation in NTHL1 has been characterized and is common in NAP patients [6, 35]. According to the COSMIC database, missense mutations, nonsense mutations, and synonymous mutations in NTHL1 account for 73.33%, 3.33%, and 13.33% of APC (-)/CAP, respectively (Fig. 2). So far, no MCR in NTHL1 have been reported. The majority of NAP patients are European, with a Dutch predominance. However, there are currently very few NAP patients reported in Asian countries [36, 37]. Grolleman et al. and Terradas et al. [38, 39] further established the differences in the frequency of NTHL1 mutations among ethnic groups, and entire open reading frame sequencing was suggested for NTHL1 mutations.
Clinical Implications of NAP
The gastrointestinal disease of NAP is similar to MAP and AFAP. The polyp burden of NAP patients varies from fewer than 10 polyps to 50–100 polyps, with the polyposis mainly presenting in adulthood [40]. However, the detection rate of NAP is much lower than that of MAP (only about 1/5 of MAP) [40]. Mutations in NTHL1 can lead to a multisystem tumor susceptibility syndrome [41]. Extraintestinal lesions of NAP include breast, endometrial, skin, duodenal, brain, and bladder cancers [30, 31, 35]. Breast and endometrial cancers are frequently associated with NAP, screening for breast and endometrial lesions in NAP is suggested by the French Oncogenetics Consortium, and the surveillance protocols for NAP are established based on MAP recommendations [31]. Furthermore, Laura et al. reported that in the absence of adenomatous polyposis, NAP is not a multi-tumor syndrome [42].
Constitutional MMR Deficiency Syndrome (CMMRD)
Discovery of CMMRD
CMMRD is an autosomal recessive disorder caused by biallelic germline mutations in the MMR genes [43, 44]. MMR genes are a group of housekeeping genes and four of them, including MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2, have been reported to be involved in the process of DNA replication. They function to recognize and repair base mismatches during DNA replication or recombination and play an important role in maintaining genetic stability [45]. Children and adolescent patients with CMMRD are susceptible to a variety of diseases, especially colorectal tumors [46]. In 2011, Jasperson et al. reported a proband of APC (-)/CAP presenting with an MMR mutation and her sister with a similar colorectal disease also presenting with an MSH6 mutation [7]. Additional studies confirmed the association between the remaining MMR genes, PMS2, MLH1, and MSH2 with APC (-)/CAP [26, 47, 48]. These results established that MMR genes are susceptibility genes for APC (-)/CAP and that errors in the DNA replication process play a critical role in the occurrence of CAP.
Genetic Background of CMMRD
Among the four MMR genes, patients harboring mutations in MSH2 are at the highest risk of adenoma, while patients with mutations in MLH1 and MSH2 suffer a higher risk of CRC [49]. The COSMIC database shows the proportion of mutations in colorectal tissues for the 4 genes, with missense mutations in MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 of 47.13%, 41.60%, 16.62%, and 51.85%; nonsense mutations of 13.41%, 22.90%, 6.41%, and 6.67%; and synonymous mutations of 4.98%, 11.83%, 2.62%, and 19.26%, respectively (Fig. 2). Additionally, very rare mutations in MLH2 [49] are reported to be associated with APC (-)/CAP. In each MMR gene, no mutation hot spot or MCR has been identified. Co-occurrence of various MMR genes is observed; for instance, concurrent loss of MLH1/PMS2 and loss of MSH2/MSH6 are frequently observed [50]. MMR genes and APC are also partially synergistic, and Engel et al. reported that patients with monoallelic mutations in MMR genes, as well as mutations in APC, also present a CAP phenotype [49]. Although CMMRD is typically aggressive, immunotherapy has been an emerging and effective treatment for it [44]. Recently, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) recommended routine genetic screening for MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 in patients with CAP [26].
Clinical Implications of CMMRD
Owing to variable gastrointestinal lesions associated with CMMRD, it is difficult to determine whether it overlaps with the classic FAP (CFAP) or AFAP phenotype [51]. Typical clinical features of gastrointestinal polyps are early age of onset, high variability in the number of polyps (usually less than 100 polyps), age-related gastrointestinal manifestations, and rapid development of “adenoma cancer” [48, 52]. Colorectal polyposis typically appears as the first symptom in most cases. CMMRD is reported to present with multisystem disorders. The extraintestinal diseases associated with CMMRD mainly include multiple café-au-lait maculae (CALM); early-onset brain tumors; leukemia, endometrial, ureteral, and renal pelvic carcinomas; and papillary migratory cell carcinoma of the bladder [7, 43, 47, 52, 53]. Because CALM has been identified as the most distinguishing phenotype and is detectable in almost all patients with CMMRD [49], attention to CALM is needed and emphasized by Durno et al. [53, 54]. Furthermore, clinical phenotypes, such as CALM, highly atypical hyperplasia, and early-onset tumors, may help differentiate CMMRD from other types of CAP. The clinical phenotypes of the four MMR genes are reported to differ. For example, patients with CMMRD-harboring mutations in PMS2 have a higher risk of developing left hemicolon cancer concurrent with brain tumors, while patients harboring MLH1 and MSH2 mutations have a higher risk of developing hematologic tumors [47].
Autosomal Dominant APC (-)/CAP
Polymerase Proofreading-Associated Polyposis (PPAP)
Discovery of PPAP
PPAP is an autosomal dominant disease caused by monoallelic germline mutations in POLE/POLD1 [55]. POLE and POLD1, DNA polymerase subunits, participate in proofreading the resulting daughter strand and excising the generated mismatch bases during DNA replication, ensuring the accuracy of replication [8, 56]. Mutations in the exonuclease domain (ED) of POLE/POLD1 affect the proofreading ability of the polymerase, resulting in the accumulation of base substitutions during replication, thereby causing hypermutations. This ultimately leads to CAP and a variety of cancers [8, 55, 57]. Palles et al. were the first to report families of CAP caused by germline mutations in POLE and POLD1, revealing that the two genes are susceptibility genes for APC (-)/CAP [8]. Briggs et al. [55] then named APC (-)/CAP with POLE/POLD1 mutations as PPAP.
Genetic Background of PPAP
The exonuclease domain (ED) plays a vital role in the proofreading activity of POLE and POLD1. Almost all the pathogenic mutations have been reported to be located within the ED of POLE/POLD1 [58, 59], while outside ED mutations are most likely nonpathogenic and not associated with PPAP [57]. According to the COSMIC database, the mutation distribution of POLE and POLD1 in colorectal tissue is 66.23% and 61.33% for missense mutations, 3.25% and 5.22% for nonsense mutations, and 12.12% and 21.78% for synonymous mutations, respectively (Fig. 2). Neither of the genes have been reported to have MCR. Of the two genes, POLE-L424V and POLD1-S478N mutations are most frequently reported in PPAP [60]. Patients harboring POLE mutations have a better prognosis and respond better to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy [8, 61, 62]. However, POLD1 mutations in PPAP are rare but more aggressive, and the efficacy of ICI therapeutics for these patients is unclear [63], indicating that screening for POLE and POLD1 genotypes may help identify patients who could benefit from immunotherapy. Concurrent mutations in POLE/POLD1 and other genes have cumulative effects such as POLD1-ATM and POLE-MSH2 simultaneous mutations leading to disease with more aggressive behavior [57]. Guidelines have included POLE/POLD1 in the genetic screening index for APC(-)/CAP [26].
Clinical Implications of PPAP
The intestinal lesions of PPAP overlap with those of CFAP and AFAP partially. Polyps appear in adulthood and range in number from 0 to 100 with a mean of 16, and the lifetime risk of CRC is 50–90% [64]. Extraintestinal symptoms, including endometrial, ovarian, breast, and brain cancers, as well as hypothyroidism, are reported frequently in PPAP [64,65,66]. Since the most prevalent are endometrial and ovarian cancers with high risk [57, 65], routine screening for mutations in POLE/POLD1 may help in the early diagnosis of patients with CAP who also have endometrial and ovarian lesions. For example, genotype–phenotype correlations for extraintestinal lesions are confirmed in PPAP. Both POLE and POLD1 have been reported to cause endometrial and brain cancers [8, 67]. However, hypothyroidism is only found in patients who have both NTHL1 and POLE mutations [66], while breast cancer is mainly associated with mutations in POLD1 [26, 58]. We suggest that when determining the genotype of PPAP, its phenotype be referred.
AXIN2-Associated Polyposis (AAP)
Discovery of AAP
AAP is an autosomal dominant disease caused by monoallelic germline mutations of AXIN2 [68]. AXIN2 is a negative regulator of the WNT signaling pathway that encodes for an axial inhibitory protein, and the product AXIN2 forms a catenin protein complex with APC, GSK3β, and CK1α in the WNT signaling pathway [69,70,71]. AXIN2 mutants (mtAXIN2) compete with wild-type AXIN2 (wtAXIN2) for binding to the β-catenin complex, preventing degradation and leading to β-catenin nucleation, thereby promoting tumorigenesis [72,73,74,75]. Lammi et al. reported a case in which an AXIN2 mutation led to the development of CAP with familial permanent hypoplasia, indicating that AXIN2 is a susceptibility gene of APC (-)/CAP [9]. Marvin and Rivera et al. further confirmed it, and we proposed to name this type of APC (-)/CAP as AAP [75, 76].
Genetic Background of AAP
The majority of AAP mutation sites in AXIN2 are concentrated at 1900-bp downstream of exon 7 [9, 75,76,77,78]. Furthermore, mutations in exon 7 region of AXIN2 are hotspot mutations causing hypodontia syndrome, CAP, and multiple cancers, indicating that exon 7 may be an MCR of AXIN2 [77]. The COSMIC database shows that in colorectal tissues, missense mutations in AXIN2 account for 39.93%, while nonsense mutations account for 5.30% and synonymous mutations account for 12.97% (Fig. 2). In addition to mutations in exonic regions, some synonymous mutations in AXIN2 were also shown to be associated with APC (-)/CAP [79].
Clinical Implications of AAP
The intestinal phenotype of AAP differs from that of AFAP or CFAP with a high degree of variability in the number, type, and location of intestinal polyps [75, 76]. The number of polyps ranges from 10 to 100 [77, 78], and odontoma is the most characteristic extraintestinal lesion. Beard et al. suggested that patients harboring the AXIN2 mutation could develop a variety of lesions, including oligodontia, ectodermal dysplasia (abnormal development of skin, hair, nails, or sweat glands), and CAP [77]. Furthermore, ovarian and endometrial cancers have been identified as potential extraintestinal manifestations of AAP [80, 81]. Since the dental anomaly is a characteristic extraintestinal manifestation of both FAP and AAP [82], it is recommended to include genetic screening for AXIN2 in CAP patients.
DUOX2-Associated Polyposis (DAP)
Discovery of DAP
DAP is an autosomal dominant disease caused by monoallelic germline mutations in DUOX2. DUOX2 encodes a double oxidase, an important NADPH oxidase family member that catalyzes the production of H2O2 from the parietal membrane of thyroid follicular epithelial cells [83]. Mutations in DUOX2 have been linked to colorectal diseases, such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) [84] and colorectal cancer [85], and it has been proposed that DUOX2 plays an important role in innate immune responses in the intestinal mucosa and maintains immune homeostasis by producing H2O2, which forms the first line of defense of the intestinal epithelium [86]. Yang et al. have recently identified DUOX2 as a susceptibility gene for CAP. The mutation in DUOX2 is reported to cause endoplasmic reticulum (ER) retention and induction of unfolded protein response (UPR), which results in abnormal cell proliferation and leads to CAP development [10]. We proposed to name this type of APC (-)/CAP as DAP.
Genetic Background of DAP
According to Yang’s report, the truncated protein hDUOX2 is found to be overexpressed in adenomas, and the germline nonsense mutation (K530X) of DUOX2 is considered to play a key role in the pedigree in relation to adenomatous polyposis [10]. In addition, two unrelated APC-negative patients were found to carry DUOX2 missense variants (R1110 and L1343F), which may exert a negative influence on the function of hDuox2 [10]. According to the COSMIC database, missense mutations account for 60.99%, nonsense mutations account for 2.13%, and synonymous mutations account for 17.73% in DUOX2 in colorectal tissues (Fig. 2). However, the presence of MCR or hotspots in DUOX2 is uncertain.
Clinical Implications of DAP
Yang’s report found three DAP patients with intestinal adenomatous polyps ranging from 10 to 100 bp [10]. The proband, a female, was detected to have 20–30 renal tubular adenomas in her proximal colon at the age of 26. At the age of 24, her sister was discovered to have hundreds of adenomatous polyps primarily in the right colon. Their mother died of colon cancer, despite a history of intestinal polyps [10]. Furthermore, endoscopy of the proband’s maternal uncle, who was 51 years old at the time, revealed colon adenomas and adenocarcinomas [10]. Additional studies are required to understand specific intestinal phenotypes and extraintestinal manifestations of DAP.
Interactions Between the Genes of APC (-)/CAP
The APC (-)/CAP susceptibility genes have been shown to interact with one another, which may influence the development and phenotype of the disease. For example, BER, polymerase proofreading activity, and MMR genes all play important roles in maintaining accuracy during DNA replication, and interactive synergies between these three systems have been demonstrated during the onset and progression of CAP (Fig. 3).
Correlation Between BER and MMR
MUTYH is reported to interact with MSH6 during DNA repair [87]. Patients with CRC-harboring MUTYH mutations have a higher rate of MSH6 mutations compared to those without MUTYH mutations [88]. Furthermore, patients who have both MUTYH and MMR gene mutations are at a significantly higher risk of developing CRC [89]. These findings suggest that MUTYH-mediated BER prevents mutations during DNA replication by working in conjunction with MMR genes.
Correlation Between Polymerase Proofreading Genes and MMR
POLD1 (and possibly POLE) has been reported to be involved in both the BER and MMR pathways [55]. A study revealed that patients harboring POLE/POLD1 mutations have a higher rate of mutations in MMR genes [57, 90]. However, mutations in POLD1 have a lesser impact on MMR but are associated with microsatellite instability [91]. Furthermore, Shlien et al. revealed that all of the patients in their study who had CMMRD hypermutations (abnormally high somatic mutations) also had POLE/POLD1 somatic mutations, indicating a synergistic relationship between polymerase proofreading genes and MMR genes [92].
Correlation Between Polymerase Proofreading Genes and BER
Conclusions and Future Perspectives
In summary, as shown in Fig. 4, the six APC (-)/CAP types can be divided into two groups based on their genetic characteristics: (1) autosomal recessive APC (-)/CAP (including MAP, NAP, and CMMRD) and (2) autosomal dominant APC (-)/CAP (including PPAP, AAP, and DAP) or three categories based on the roles of these genes: (1) APC (-)/CAP by BER pathway (including MAP and NAP), polymerase proofreading pathway (including PPAP), and mismatch repair pathway (including CMMRD) are involved in proofreading and repair during DNA replication; (2) APC(-)/CAP by WNT signaling pathway regulation (including AAP); and (3) DAP (Fig. 4). The interaction between multiple susceptibility genes produces a partial synergy for the onset and progression of CAP. Details are shown in Table 1. In addition, several genes, such as PTEN, GREM1, and GSK3β, are potential susceptibility genes for CAP(CRC) [1, 93].
Interaction of genes associated with APC (-)/CAP suggests that CAP is a polygenic disease, with CAP occurring as a result of the synergistic effects of multiple genes. In terms of genetic characteristics, APC (-)/CAP has dominant and recessive inheritance characteristics, as well as germline mutation characteristics of monoallelic and diallelic mutations. It indicates that genes associated with APC (-)/CAP have different inheritance patterns; however, dominant genes and diallelic mutations are clearly more harmful. Moreover, all the reported genes inherited in autosomal dominant patterns are monoallelic, whereas all genes inherited in autosomal recessive patterns are diallelic. It is worth investigating whether there is a correspondence between the two. In terms of clinical phenotype, there are variations between the number of polyps, the probability, timing of intestinal polyp malignancy, and extraintestinal lesions between different APC (-)/CAP. Identifying pathogenic genes by their clinical phenotypes (e.g., dominant or recessive genetic characteristics combined with the number of polyps and other phenotypes to determine their corresponding pathogenic genotypes) can significantly improve the detection rate of pathogenic genes. This approach could be used for future studies. In terms of clinical treatment, studies on the association between APC (-)/CAP susceptibility genes could be useful for the early diagnosis and treatment of patients. For example, both MAP and NAP mediate their pathogenic effects by altering the BER signaling pathway, so therapies targeting the BER signaling pathway could be effective for the treatment of both APC (-)/CAP types despite the difference in mutation pattern. However, MAP and AAP mediate their pathogenic effects via different signaling pathways. Despite the shared APC (-)/CAP, different therapeutic approaches are required for the two treatments of patients with MAP and APP.
There are some limitations. For treatments options for APC (-)/CAP, since genotype–phenotype diversity is likely a source of difficulty for diagnostics and treatment, further research is required to better understand the key components of APC (-)/CAP susceptibility and optimal management strategies. And for Modifier alleles, there is evidence to suggest that phenotypic differences are caused by modifier alleles that can influence individual susceptibility to cancer by enhancing or suppressing disease initiation, growth, and/or progression. Modifier alleles are present in APC (-)/CAP, however, more evidence is needed for deep research, and modifier alleles may be an important direction for future research on APC (-)/CAP.
In this review, we elaborate on the genetic features of APC (-)/CAP as well as the genotype–phenotype relationship comprehensively. Although the cause of many APC (-)/CAP remains unknown, the use of family-linkage analysis techniques, as well as the availability of high-throughput sequencing, may aid in accurately defining APC (-)/CAP types and identifying unknown APC (-)/CAP susceptibility genes. Designing therapeutic strategies targeting different genes and corresponding signaling pathways would benefit such patients. Furthermore, additional studies on CAP as a precancerous lesion in CRC will provide new insights into the management of CRC. To our knowledge, this is the first review that provides an outline of pathogenic genes causing autosomal recessive and dominant CAP and clinical phenotypes with APC mutation-negative CAP.
Abbreviations
- ACMG:
-
American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics
- APC:
-
Adenomatous polyposis coli
- AXIN2:
-
Axis inhibition protein 2
- BER:
-
Base excision repair
- CALM:
-
Café-au-lait maculae
- CAP:
-
Colorectal adenomatous polyposis
- CMMRD:
-
Constitutional mismatch repair deficiency
- COSMIC:
-
Catalogue of Somatic Mutations in Cancer
- CRC:
-
Colorectal cancer
- DUOX2:
-
Dual oxidase 2
- ED:
-
Exonuclease domain
- ER:
-
Endoplasmic reticulum
- FAP:
-
Familial adenomatous polyposis
- ICI:
-
Immune checkpoint inhibitor
- MAP:
-
MUTYH-associated polyposis
- MCR:
-
Mutation cluster region
- MMR:
-
Mismatch repair
- MUTYH:
-
MutY homologue
- NTHL1:
-
Nth-like DNA glycosylase 1
- POLD1:
-
DNA polymerase delta 1
- POLE:
-
DNA polymerase epsilon
- PPAP:
-
Polymerase proofreading-associated polyposis
- UPR:
-
Unfolded protein response
References
Valle L, de Voer RM, Goldberg Y et al. Update on genetic predisposition to colorectal cancer and polyposis. Mol Asp Med 2019;69:10–26.
Cripps WH. Two cases of disseminated polypus of the rectum. Trans Pathol Soc London 1882;33:165–168.
Groden J, Thliveris A, Samowitz W et al. Identification and characterization of the familial adenomatous polyposis-coli gene. Cell 1991;66:589–600.
Monahan KJ, Bradshaw N, Dolwani S et al. Guidelines for the management of hereditary colorectal cancer from the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG)/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI)/United Kingdom Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG). Gut 2020;69:411–444.
Al-Tassan N, Chmiel NH, Maynard J et al. Inherited variants of MYH associated with somatic G:C–>T: a mutations in colorectal tumors. Nat Genet 2002;30:227–232.
Weren RD, Ligtenberg MJ, Kets CM et al. A germline homozygous mutation in the base-excision repair gene NTHL1 causes adenomatous polyposis and colorectal cancer. Nat Genet 2015;47:668–671.
Jasperson KW, Samowitz WS, Burt RW. Constitutional mismatch repair-deficiency syndrome presenting as colonic adenomatous polyposis: clues from the skin. Clin Genet 2011;80:394–397.
Palles C, Cazier JB, Howarth KM et al. Germline mutations affecting the proofreading domains of POLE and POLD1 predispose to colorectal adenomas and carcinomas. Nat Genet 2013;45:136–144.
Lammi L, Arte S, Somer M, Jarvinen H, Lahermo P, Thesleff I, Pirinen S, Nieminen P. Mutations in AXIN2 cause familial tooth agenesis and predispose to colorectal cancer. Am J Hum Genet 2004;74:1043–1050.
Yang MY, Zhao YX, Ding YW, Wang J, Tan YN, Xu D, Yuan Y. A truncated protein product of the germline variant of the DUOX2 gene leads to adenomatous polyposis. Cancer Biol Med 2021;18:215–226.
Bouguen G, Manfredi S, Blayau M, Dugast C, Buecher B, Bonneau D, Siproudhis L, David V, Bretagne JF. Colorectal adenomatous polyposis Associated with MYH mutations: genotype and phenotype characteristics. Dis Colon Rectum 2007;50:1612–1617.
Chen J, Wu X, Wang Y, Pan Y, Ren Y, Nakabeppu Y, Fan Y, Wang Y. Mutyh deficiency downregulates mitochondrial fusion proteins and causes cardiac dysfunction via α-ketoglutaric acid reduction with oxidative stress. Free Rad Res 2022;56:129–142.
Farrington SM, Tenesa A, Barnetson R, Wiltshire A, Prendergast J, Porteous M, Campbell H, Dunlop MG. Germline susceptibility to colorectal cancer due to base-excision repair gene defects. Am J Hum Genet 2005;77:112–119.
Aretz S, Tricarico R, Papi L et al. MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP): evidence for the origin of the common European mutations p. Tyr179Cys and p. Gly396Asp by founder events. Eur J Hum Genet 2014;22:923–929.
Yamaguchi S, Ogata H, Katsumata D, Nakajima M, Fujii T, Tsutsumi S, Asao T, Sasaki K, Kuwano H, Kato H. MUTYH-associated colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyposis. Surgery Today 2014;44:593–600.
Thomas LE, Hurley JJ, Sanchez AA et al. Duodenal adenomas and cancer in MUTYH-associated polyposis: an international cohort study. Gastroenterology 2021;160:952-954.e954.
D’Elia G, Caliendo G, Casamassimi A, Cioffi M, Molinari AM, Vietri MT. APC and MUTYH analysis in FAP patients: a novel mutation in APC gene and genotype-phenotype correlation. Genes (Basel) 2018;9:322.
Viel A, Bruselles A, Meccia E et al. A specific mutational signature associated with DNA 8-oxoguanine persistence in MUTYH-defective colorectal cancer. Ebiomedicine 2017;20:39–49.
Li N, Kang Q, Yang L, Zhao XJ, Xue LJ, Wang X, Li AQ, Li CG, Sheng JQ. Clinical characterization and mutation spectrum in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis in China. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019;34:1497–1503.
Kim H, Kim HL, Chi SG, Lee SK, Loo GR, Dong SH, Kim BH, Chang YW, Lee JI, Chang R. Absence of MutY homologue mutation in patients with multiple sporadic adenomatous polyps in Korea. World J Gastroenterol 2006;12:951–955.
Miyaki M, Iijima T, Yamaguchi T, Hishima T, Tamura K, Utsunomiya J, Mori T. Germline mutations of the MYH gene in Japanese patients with multiple colorectal adenomas. Mutat Res 2005;578:430–433.
Inra JA, Steyerberg EW, Grover S, McFarland A, Syngal S, Kastrinos F. Racial variation in frequency and phenotypes of APC and MUTYH mutations in 6,169 individuals undergoing genetic testing. Genet Med 2015;17:815–821.
Lubbe SJ, Di Bernardo MC, Chandler IP, Houlston RS. Clinical implications of the colorectal cancer risk associated with MUTYH mutation. J Clinical Oncol 2009;27:3975–3980.
Magrin L, Fanale D, Brando C et al. MUTYH-associated tumor syndrome: the other face of MAP. Oncogene 2022;41:2531–2539.
Menahem B, Alves A, Regimbeau JM, Sabbagh C. Colorectal family polyadenomatous diseases. What management in 2020? J Visc Surg 2020;157:127–135.
Mao R, Krautscheid P, Graham RP, Ganguly A, Shankar S, Ferber M, Hegde M, Comm ALQA. Genetic testing for inherited colorectal cancer and polyposis, 2021 revision: a technical standard of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Genet Med 2021;23:1807–1817.
Villy MC, Masliah-Planchon J, Buecher B, Beaulaton C, Vincent-Salomon A, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Colas C. Endometrial cancer may be part of the MUTYH-associated polyposis cancer spectrum. Eur J Med Genet 2022;65:104385.
Gallinger S. Risk of extracolonic cancers for people with biallelic and monoallelic mutations in MUTYH (vol 139, pg 1557, 2016). Int J Cancer 2017;141:E7–E7.
Terlouw D, Suerink M, Singh SS et al. Declining detection rates for APC and biallelic MUTYH variants in polyposis patients, implications for DNA testing policy. Eur J Hum Genet 2019;28:222–230.
Kuiper RP, Hoogerbrugge N. NTHL1 defines novel cancer syndrome. Oncotarget 2015;6:34069–34070.
Boulouard F, Kasper E, Buisine MP et al. Further delineation of the NTHL1 associated syndrome: a report from the French oncogenetic consortium. Clin Genet 2021;99:662–672.
Vodicka P, Urbanova M, Makovicky P et al. Oxidative damage in sporadic colorectal cancer: molecular mapping of base excision repair glycosylases in colorectal cancer patients. Int J Mol Sci 2020;21:2473.
Broderick P, Dobbins SE, Chubb D, Kinnersley B, Dunlop MG, Tomlinson I, Houlston RS. Validation of recently proposed colorectal cancer susceptibility gene variants in an analysis of families and patients-a systematic review. Gastroenterology 2017;152:75-77 e74.
Fostira F, Kontopodis E, Apostolou P, Fragkaki M, Androulakis N, Yannoukakos D, Konstantopoulou I, Saloustros E. Extending the clinical phenotype associated with biallelic NTHL1 germline mutations. Clin Genet 2018;94:588–589.
Belhadj S, Mur P, Navarro M, Gonzalez S, Moreno V, Capella G, Valle L. Delineating the phenotypic spectrum of the NTHL1-associated polyposis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017;15:461–462.
Khan N, Lipsa A, Arunachal G, Ramadwar M, Sarin R. Novel mutations and phenotypic associations identified through APC, MUTYH, NTHL1, POLD1, POLE gene analysis in Indian familial adenomatous polyposis cohort. Sci Rep 2017;7:2214.
Toh MR, Chiang JB, Chong ST et al. Germline pathogenic variants in homologous recombination and DNA repair genes in an asian cohort of young-onset colorectal cancer. JNCI Cancer Spectr 2018;2:pky054.
Grolleman JE, de Voer RM, Elsayed FA et al. Mutational signature analysis reveals NTHL1 deficiency to cause a multi-tumor phenotype. Cancer Cell 2019;35:256-266 e255.
Terradas M, Munoz-Torres PM, Belhadj S, Aiza G, Navarro M, Brunet J, Capella G, Valle L. Contribution to colonic polyposis of recently proposed predisposing genes and assessment of the prevalence of NTHL1- and MSH3-associated polyposes. Hum Mutat 2019;40:1910–1923.
Weren RD, Ligtenberg MJ. Geurts van Kessel A, De Voer RM, Hoogerbrugge N, Kuiper RP: NTHL1 and MUTYH polyposis syndromes: two sides of the same coin? J Pathol 2018;244:135–142.
Tomlinson I. The mendelian colorectal cancer syndromes. Ann Clin Biochem 2015;52:690–692.
Belhadj S, Quintana I, Mur P et al. NTHL1 biallelic mutations seldom cause colorectal cancer, serrated polyposis or a multi-tumor phenotype, in absence of colorectal adenomas. Sci Rep 2019;9:9020.
Wimmer K, Etzler J. Constitutional mismatch repair-deficiency syndrome: have we so far seen only the tip of an iceberg? Hum Genet 2008;124:105–122.
Westdorp H, Kolders S, Hoogerbrugge N, de Vries IJM, Jongmans MCJ, Schreibelt G. Immunotherapy holds the key to cancer treatment and prevention in constitutional mismatch repair deficiency (CMMRD) syndrome. Cancer Lett 2017;403:159–164.
Lavoine N, Colas C, Muleris M et al. Constitutional mismatch repair deficiency syndrome: clinical description in a French cohort. J Med Genet 2015;52:770–778.
Suerink M, Wimmer K, Brugieres L et al. Report of the fifth meeting of the European Consortium “Care for CMMRD” (C4CMMRD), Leiden, The Netherlands, July 6th 2019. Fam Cancer 2021;20:67–73.
Herkert JC, Niessen RC, Olderode-Berends MJ et al. Paediatric intestinal cancer and polyposis due to bi-allelic PMS2 mutations: case series, review and follow-up guidelines. Eur J Cancer 2011;47:965–982.
Wimmer K, Kratz CP, Vasen HFA et al. Diagnostic criteria for constitutional mismatch repair deficiency syndrome: suggestions of the European consortium “care for CMMRD” (C4CMMRD). J Med Genet 2014;51:355–365.
Engel C, Ahadova A, Seppala TT et al. Associations of pathogenic variants in MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6 with risk of colorectal adenomas and tumors and with somatic mutations in patients with lynch syndrome. Gastroenterology 2020;158:1326–1333.
Jacobi EM, Landon G, Broaddus RR, Roy-Chowdhuri S. Evaluating mismatch repair/microsatellite instability status using cytology effusion specimens to determine eligibility for immunotherapy. Arch Path Lab Med 2021;145:46–54.
Olkinuora A, Nieminen TT, Mårtensson E et al. Biallelic germline nonsense variant of MLH3 underlies polyposis predisposition. Genet Med 2019;21:1868–1873.
Durno CA, Aronson M, Tabori U, Malkin D, Gallinger S, Chan HS. Oncologic surveillance for subjects with biallelic mismatch repair gene mutations: 10 year follow-up of a kindred. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2012;59:652–656.
Vasen HF, Ghorbanoghli Z, Bourdeaut F et al. Guidelines for surveillance of individuals with constitutional mismatch repair-deficiency proposed by the European Consortium “Care for CMMR-D” (C4CMMR-D). J Med Genet 2014;51:283–293.
Sag E, Erkut M, Saygin I, Cebi AH, Bahadir A, Erduran E, Saruhan H, Cakir M. Constitutional mismatch repair gene defect syndrome presenting with adenomatous polyposis and cafe au lait spots: a case report. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2020;42:E689–E691.
Briggs S, Tomlinson I. Germline and somatic polymerase epsilon and delta mutations define a new class of hypermutated colorectal and endometrial cancers. J Pathol 2013;230:148–153.
Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive molecular characterization of human colon and rectal cancer. Nature 2012;487:330–337.
Mur P, Garcia-Mulero S, Del Valle J et al. Role of POLE and POLD1 in familial cancer. Genet Med 2020;22:2089–2100.
Bellido F, Pineda M, Aiza G et al. POLE and POLD1 mutations in 529 kindred with familial colorectal cancer and/or polyposis: review of reported cases and recommendations for genetic testing and surveillance. Genet Med 2016;18:325–332.
Rayner E, van Gool IC, Palles C, Kearsey SE, Bosse T, Tomlinson I, Church DN. A panoply of errors: polymerase proofreading domain mutations in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2016;16:71–81.
Bacolla A, Cooper DN, Vasquez KM. Mechanisms of base substitution mutagenesis in cancer genomes. Genes (Basel) 2014;5(1):108–146.
Garmezy B, Gheeya J, Lin HY et al. Clinical and molecular characterization of POLE mutations as predictive biomarkers of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced cancers. JCO Precis Oncol 2022;6:e2100267.
Bourdais R, Rousseau B, Pujals A, Boussion H, Joly C, Guillemin A, Baumgaertner I, Neuzillet C, Tournigand C. Polymerase proofreading domain mutations: new opportunities for immunotherapy in hypermutated colorectal cancer beyond MMR deficiency. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2017;113:242–248.
Ito T, Nomizu T, Eguchi H et al. The first case report of polymerase proofreading-associated polyposis in POLD1 variant, c. 1433G>A p. S478N in Japan. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2020;50:1080–1083.
Jelsig AM, Byrjalsen A, Busk Madsen M, Kuhlmann TP, van Overeem Hansen T, Wadt KAW, Karstensen JG. Novel genetic causes of gastrointestinal polyposis syndromes. Appl Clin Genet 2021;14:455–466.
Palles C, Martin L, Domingo E et al. The clinical features of polymerase proof-reading associated polyposis (PPAP) and recommendations for patient management. Fam Cancer 2022;21:197–209.
Lorca V, Rueda D, Martin-Morales L et al. Contribution of new adenomatous polyposis predisposition genes in an unexplained attenuated spanish cohort by multigene panel testing. Sci Rep 2019;9:9814.
Church DN, Briggs SE, Palles C et al. DNA polymerase epsilon and delta exonuclease domain mutations in endometrial cancer. Hum Mol Genet 2013;22:2820–2828.
Macklin-Mantia SK, Hines SL, Chaichana KL, Donaldson AM, Ko SL, Zhai Q, Samadder NJ, Riegert-Johnson DL. Case report expanding the germline AXIN2- related phenotype to include olfactory neuroblastoma and gastric adenoma. BMC Med Genet 2020;21:161.
Polakis P. The many ways of Wnt in cancer. Curr Opin Genet Dev 2007;17:45–51.
Ranes M, Zaleska M, Sakalas S, Knight R, Guettler S. Reconstitution of the destruction complex defines roles of AXIN polymers and APC in beta-catenin capture, phosphorylation, and ubiquitylation. Mol Cell 2021;81:3246-3261.e11.
Nong J, Kang K, Shi Q, Zhu X, Tao Q, Chen YG. Phase separation of Axin organizes the beta-catenin destruction complex. J Cell Biol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.202012112.
Peng Y, Xu Y, Zhang X et al. A novel protein AXIN1–295aa encoded by circAXIN1 activates the Wnt/beta-catenin signaling pathway to promote gastric cancer progression. Mol Cancer. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12943-021-01457-w.
Wang FW, Wen L, Zhu SW, Yao Q, Cai YM, Ma G. Mechanism of Wnt signaling pathway regulation by a truncated mutant of Axin2 in colorectal cancer. Ai zheng 2007;26:1041–1046.
Lejeune S, Guillemot F, Triboulet JP, Cattan S, Mouton C, Porchet N, Manouvrier S, Buisine MP. Low frequency ofAXIN2 mutations and high frequency ofMUTYH mutations in patients with multiple polyposis. Human Mutation 2006;27:1064–1064.
Marvin ML, Mazzoni SM, Herron CM, Edwards S, Gruber SB, Petty EM. AXIN2-associated autosomal dominant ectodermal dysplasia and neoplastic syndrome. Am J Med Genet Part A 2011;155:898–902.
Rivera B, Perea J, Sanchez E, Villapun M, Sanchez-Tome E, Mercadillo F, Robledo M, Benitez J, Urioste M. A novel AXIN2 germline variant associated with attenuated FAP without signs of oligondontia or ectodermal dysplasia. Eur J Hum Genet 2014;22(3):423–426.
Beard C, Purvis R, Winship IM, Macrae FA, Buchanan DD. Phenotypic confirmation of oligodontia, colorectal polyposis and cancer in a family carrying an exon 7 nonsense variant in the AXIN2 gene. Fam Cancer 2019;18:311–315.
Chan JM, Clendenning M, Joseland S et al. Rare germline variants in the AXIN2 gene in families with colonic polyposis and colorectal cancer. Fam Cancer. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10689-021-00283-9.
Yang J, Liu WQ, Li WL, Chen C, Zhu Z, Wang ZQ, Dong J. Detection of APC, MYH and AXIN2 gene mutations for screening germline mutations predisposing to familial adenomatous polyposis. Shijie Huaren Xiaohua Zazhi 2015;23:556–562.
Menezes R, Marazita ML, Goldstein McHenry T, Cooper ME, Bardi K, Brandon C, Letra A, Martin RA, Vieira AR. AXIS inhibition protein 2, orofacial clefts and a family history of cancer. J Am Dent Assoc 2009;140:80–84.
Salahshor S, Woodgett JR. The links between axin and carcinogenesis. J Clin Pathol 2005;58:225–236.
Yu D, Ng Cw B, Zhu H, Liu J, Lin Y. Bone and dental abnormalities as first signs of familial Gardner’s syndrome in a Chinese family: a literature review and a case report. Med Sci. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1051/medsci/201834f104.
Wang F, Zang Y, Li M, Liu W, Wang Y, Yu X, Li H, Wang F, Liu S. DUOX2 and DUOXA2 variants confer susceptibility to thyroid dysgenesis and gland-in-situ with congenital hypothyroidism. Front Endocrinol. 2020. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2020.00237.
Grasberger H, Magis AT, Sheng E et al. DUOX2 variants associate with preclinical disturbances in microbiota-immune homeostasis and increased inflammatory bowel disease risk. J Clin Invest. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI141676.
Zhang X, Liu Y, Zhou X, Fan Z, Han J, Feng L, Zuo J, Wang G. Effect of DUOX2 on sensitivity of colorectal cancer cells to 5-fluorouracil. Chinese J Cancer Biotherapy 2020;27:1365–1371.
Grasberger H, Gao J, Nagao-Kitamoto H et al. Increased expression of DUOX2 is an epithelial response to mucosal dysbiosis required for immune homeostasis in mouse intestine. Gastroenterology 2015;149:1849–1859.
Gu YS, Parker A, Wilson TM, Bai HB, Chang DY, Lu AL. Human MutY homolog, a DNA glycosylase involved in base excision repair, physically and functionally interacts with mismatch repair proteins human MutS homolog 2/human MutS homolog 6. J Biol Chem 2002;277:11135–11142.
Giraldez MD, Balaguer F, Caldes T et al. Association of MUTYH and MSH6 germline mutations in colorectal cancer patients. Fam Cancer 2009;8:525–531.
Win AK, Reece JC, Buchanan DD et al. Risk of colorectal cancer for people with a mutation in both a MUTYH and a DNA mismatch repair gene. Fam Cancer 2015;14:575–583.
Sehested A, Meade J, Scheie D et al. Constitutional POLE variants causing a phenotype reminiscent of constitutional mismatch repair deficiency. Hum Mutat 2022;43:85–96.
Yao J, Gong Y, Zhao W et al. Comprehensive analysis of POLE and POLD1 Gene Variations identifies cancer patients potentially benefit from immunotherapy in Chinese population. Sci Rep. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-52414-z.
Shlien A, Campbell BB, de Borja R et al. Combined hereditary and somatic mutations of replication error repair genes result in rapid onset of ultra-hypermutated cancers. Nat Genet 2015;47:257–262.
Ma H, Brosens LAA, Offerhaus GJA, Giardiello FM, de Leng WWJ, Montgomery EA. Pathology and genetics of hereditary colorectal cancer. Pathology 2018;50:49–59.
Acknowledgments
None.
Funding
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 82160533 and 81760511), Applied Basic Foundation of Yunnan Province (Grant No.202001AT070009), Yunnan Fundamental Research Projects (Grant No. 2019FA039), 535 Talent Project of First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University (Grant No.2022535D07), and Yunnan Health Training Project of High-Level Talents (Grant No. D-2019032).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
LZ contributed to writing of the original draft, data collection, editing, and reviewing of manuscript. JD contributed to reviewing, study design, & editing of the manuscript. WL contributed to review & editing of the manuscript. ZK contributed to review & editing of the manuscript. JY contributed to study design, visualization, supervision, writing of the original draft, and writing, reviewing, & editing of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interests
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Zhu, LH., Dong, J., Li, WL. et al. Genotype–Phenotype Correlations in Autosomal Dominant and Recessive APC Mutation-Negative Colorectal Adenomatous Polyposis. Dig Dis Sci 68, 2799–2810 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-023-07890-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-023-07890-9