Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice (Jan 2021)

Revisiting multiple erroneous genetic testing results and clinical misinterpretations in a patient with Li-Fraumeni syndrome: lessons for translational medicine

  • Tatiana N. Sokolova,
  • Valeriy V. Breder,
  • Irina S. Shumskaya,
  • Evgeny N. Suspitsin,
  • Svetlana N. Aleksakhina,
  • Grigoriy A. Yanus,
  • Vladislav I. Tiurin,
  • Alexandr O. Ivantsov,
  • Barbara Vona,
  • Grigoriy A. Raskin,
  • Sergey V. Gamajunov,
  • Evgeny N. Imyanitov

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13053-020-00157-8
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19, no. 1
pp. 1 – 7

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Many cancer patients undergo sophisticated laboratory testing, which requires proper interpretation and interaction between different specialists. Case presentation We describe a patient with an extensive family history of cancer, who was diagnosed with bilateral breast cancer and two lung cancer lumps by the age of 40 years. She submitted a lung cancer specimen to a genetic profiling service, which reported the presence of the EGFR mutation (a combination of G719S and L833V substitutions) and the TP53 с.322_327del (p.G108_F109del) mutation in the tumor tissue. Possible therapeutic options were discussed at a medical conference, where one of the discussants raised a concern that the identified TP53 mutation may not necessarily be somatic, but reflect the germ-line status of the gene. Review of clinical records and follow-up dialog with the patient revealed, that she previously provided her blood for DNA analysis in two laboratories. The first laboratory utilized a custom NGS assay and did not detect the TP53 mutation, instead pointed to a potential pathogenic significance of the MSH6 c.2633 T > C (p.V878A) allele. The second laboratory revealed the TP53 с.322_327del (p.G108_F109del) allele but stated in the written report that it has an unknown pathogenic significance. To resolve the possible uncertainty regarding the role of the TP53 с.322_327del (p.G108_F109del) variant, we suggested that the patient invite her second cousin for genetic testing, as she was affected by neuroblastoma at the age of 3 years. This analysis revealed the presence of the same TP53 variant. Conclusion We provide point-by-point discussion, reviewing multiple laboratory mistakes and clinical misinterpretations occurred with this patient. This case report exemplifies the need to involve rigorous clinical expertise in the daily practice of medical laboratory facilities.

Keywords