Purpose

By incorporating major developments in genetics, ophthalmology, dermatology, and neuroimaging, to revise the diagnostic criteria for neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) and to establish diagnostic criteria for Legius syndrome (LGSS).

Methods

We used a multistep process, beginning with a Delphi method involving global experts and subsequently involving non-NF experts, patients, and foundations/patient advocacy groups.

Results

We reached consensus on the minimal clinical and genetic criteria for diagnosing and differentiating NF1 and LGSS, which have phenotypic overlap in young patients with pigmentary findings. Criteria for the mosaic forms of these conditions are also recommended.

Conclusion

The revised criteria for NF1 incorporate new clinical features and genetic testing, whereas the criteria for LGSS were created to differentiate the two conditions. It is likely that continued refinement of these new criteria will be necessary as investigators (1) study the diagnostic properties of the revised criteria, (2) reconsider criteria not included in this process, and (3) identify new clinical and other features of these conditions. For this reason, we propose an initiative to update periodically the diagnostic criteria for NF1 and LGSS.

We present an extensive assessment of mutation burden through sequencing analysis of >81,000 tumors from pediatric and adult patients, including tumors with hypermutation caused by chemotherapy, carcinogens, or germline alterations. Hypermutation was detected in tumor types not previously associated with high mutation burden. Replication repair deficiency was a major contributing factor. We uncovered new driver mutations in the replication-repair-associated DNA polymerases and a distinct impact of microsatellite instability and replication repair deficiency on the scale of mutation load. Unbiased clustering, based on mutational context, revealed clinically relevant subgroups regardless of the tumors' tissue of origin, highlighting similarities in evolutionary dynamics leading to hypermutation. Mutagens, such as UV light, were implicated in unexpected cancers, including sarcomas and lung tumors. The order of mutational signatures identified previous treatment and germline replication repair deficiency, which improved management of patients and families. These data will inform tumor classification, genetic testing, and clinical trial design.

Purpose

Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is characterized by a highly variable clinical presentation, but almost all NF1-affected adults present with cutaneous and/or subcutaneous neurofibromas. Exceptions are individuals heterozygous for the NF1 in-frame deletion, c.2970_2972del (p.Met992del), associated with a mild phenotype without any externally visible tumors.

Methods

A total of 135 individuals from 103 unrelated families, all carrying the constitutional NF1 p.Met992del pathogenic variant and clinically assessed using the same standardized phenotypic checklist form, were included in this study.

Results

None of the individuals had externally visible plexiform or histopathologically confirmed cutaneous or subcutaneous neurofibromas. We did not identify any complications, such as symptomatic optic pathway gliomas (OPGs) or symptomatic spinal neurofibromas; however, 4.8% of individuals had nonoptic brain tumors, mostly low-grade and asymptomatic, and 38.8% had cognitive impairment/learning disabilities. In an individual with the NF1 constitutional c.2970_2972del and three astrocytomas, we provided proof that all were NF1-associated tumors given loss of heterozygosity at three intragenic NF1 microsatellite markers and c.2970_2972del.

Conclusion

We demonstrate that individuals with the NF1 p.Met992del pathogenic variant have a mild NF1 phenotype lacking clinically suspected plexiform, cutaneous, or subcutaneous neurofibromas. However, learning difficulties are clearly part of the phenotypic presentation in these individuals and will require specialized care.

Purpose

Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is characterized by a highly variable clinical presentation, but almost all NF1-affected adults present with cutaneous and/or subcutaneous neurofibromas. Exceptions are individuals heterozygous for the NF1 in-frame deletion, c.2970_2972del (p.Met992del), associated with a mild phenotype without any externally visible tumors.

Methods

A total of 135 individuals from 103 unrelated families, all carrying the constitutional NF1 p.Met992del pathogenic variant and clinically assessed using the same standardized phenotypic checklist form, were included in this study.

Results

None of the individuals had externally visible plexiform or histopathologically confirmed cutaneous or subcutaneous neurofibromas. We did not identify any complications, such as symptomatic optic pathway gliomas (OPGs) or symptomatic spinal neurofibromas; however, 4.8% of individuals had nonoptic brain tumors, mostly low-grade and asymptomatic, and 38.8% had cognitive impairment/learning disabilities. In an individual with the NF1 constitutional c.2970_2972del and three astrocytomas, we provided proof that all were NF1-associated tumors given loss of heterozygosity at three intragenic NF1 microsatellite markers and c.2970_2972del.

Conclusion

We demonstrate that individuals with the NF1 p.Met992del pathogenic variant have a mild NF1 phenotype lacking clinically suspected plexiform, cutaneous, or subcutaneous neurofibromas. However, learning difficulties are clearly part of the phenotypic presentation in these individuals and will require specialized care.