Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Apr 1.
Published in final edited form as: Acta Neuropathol. 2014 Jul 15;128(4):583–595. doi: 10.1007/s00401-014-1318-7

Germ-line and somatic DICER1 mutations in pineoblastoma

Leanne de Kock 1,2, Nelly Sabbaghian 3, Harriet Druker 4,5, Evan Weber 6, Nancy Hamel 7,8, Suzanne Miller 9, Catherine S Choong 10,11, Nicholas G Gottardo 12,13, Ursula R Kees 14, Surya P Rednam 15, Liselotte P van Hest 16, Marjolijn C Jongmans 17, Shalini Jhangiani 18, James R Lupski 19,20,21, Margaret Zacharin 22, Dorothée Bouron-Dal Soglio 23, Annie Huang 24, John R Priest 25, Arie Perry 26, Sabine Mueller 27, Steffen Albrecht 28, David Malkin 29,30,31, Richard G Grundy 32, William D Foulkes 33,34,35,36,✉
PMCID: PMC4381868  NIHMSID: NIHMS673221  PMID: 25022261

Abstract

Germ-line RB-1 mutations predispose to pineoblastoma (PinB), but other predisposing genetic factors are not well established. We recently identifed a germ-line DICER1 mutation in a child with a PinB. This was accompanied by loss of heterozygosity (LOH) of the wild-type allele within the tumour. We set out to establish the prevalence of DICER1 mutations in an opportunistically ascertained series of PinBs. Twenty-one PinB cases were studied: eighteen cases had not undergone previous testing for DICER1 mutations; three patients were known carriers of germ-line DICER1 mutations. The eighteen PinBs were sequenced by Sanger and/or Fluidigm-based next-generation sequencing to identify DICER1 mutations in blood gDNA and/or tumour gDNA. Testing for somatic DICER1 mutations was also conducted on one case with a known germ-line DICER1 mutation. From the eighteen PinBs, we identified four deleterious DICER1 mutations, three of which were germ line in origin, and one for which a germ line versus somatic origin could not be determined; in all four, the second allele was also inactivated leading to complete loss of DICER1 protein. No somatic DICER1 RNase IIIb mutations were identified. One PinB arising in a germ-line DICER1 mutation carrier was found to have LOH. This study suggests that germ-line DICER1 mutations make a clinically significant contribution to PinB, establishing DICER1 as an important susceptibility gene for PinB and demonstrates PinB to be a manifestation of a germ-line DICER1 mutation. The means by which the second allele is inactivated may differ from other DICER1-related tumours.

Keywords: DICER1, miRNA processing, Paediatric brain tumours, Pineal gland, Childhood cancer, Mutation, Pineoblastoma, OMIM #601200,

Introduction

Pineoblastoma (PinB) is a rare primitive neuroectodermal tumour (PNET) arising in the pineal gland. PinBs are classified as a WHO grade IV tumour and comprise one-fourth to one-half of pineal parenchymal tumours [12, 40]. The mean age of onset is 12.6 years but with a wide range of 1–39 years [12, 26]. PinBs are uncommon tumours, although there is one familial example reported [23, 30]. Due to the rarity of PinB, little is known about their underlying biology and genetics. Germ-line mutations in the retinoblastoma (Rb) gene RB-1 can lead to PinB in the so-called “trilateral Rb” [20] and there is about a 1 % incidence of PinB among children with Rb who are treated with current protocols [35, 47]. Children with a family history of Rb, and those treated by external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) have a five-to tenfold higher incidence of PinB compared with those without a family history or not treated with EBRT [4, 27]. A notable reduction in incidence of PinB could be related to a preventive effect of chemo-therapeutic treatment of Rb [43], the withholding of EBRT [25], or a combination of the two. However, since the incidence of PinB is ten times higher in bilateral Rb than in unilateral Rb (0.5 % among unilateral Rb; 5–13 % among sporadic bilateral Rb; 5–15 % among familial bilateral Rb) [20, 35], germ-line mutations in RB-1 are likely to be a major predisposing factor. Despite this, it is not known what proportion of unselected PinBs carry germ-line RB-1 mutations. Moreover, the importance of other predisposing genetic factors is not established.

Recently, we published a case report of a child with PinB and a germ-line DICER1 mutation; loss of heterozygosity (LOH) of the wild-type DICER1 allele was detected within the tumour [38]. Neither of these two events had been previously reported. We subsequently set out to establish (a) the prevalence of germ-line and somatic DICER1 mutations in PinB and (b) the mechanism by which the somatic hits occur in PinB.

Germ-line mutations in DICER1 predispose individuals to a distinctive autosomal dominant tumour/dysplasia predisposition syndrome with only moderate penetrance (OMIM #601200) resulting in quite rare diseases of children and young adults. Included are pleuropulmonary blastoma [7, 33, 42], cystic nephroma [2, 11], Wilms tumour [49] and rare anaplastic sarcoma of kidney [11], multinodular goitre [36] and differentiated thyroid carcinoma [9], ovarian sex cord stromal cell tumours, especially Sertoli– Leydig cell tumours [15, 48], embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma of the uterine cervix [46] and other sites [10], ciliary body medulloepithelioma [31], nasal chondromesenchymal hamartoma [32], pituitary blastoma [8] and pineoblastoma [38].

Methods

Patients and samples

Our study population included 21 PinBs (Table 1; Fig. 1 and Supplementary Figure S1), six of which were clinically referred (cases 8–11, 17 and 18), twelve of which were obtained from a registry or pathology department (cases 1–7 and 12–16), and three of which occurred in known carriers of germ-line DICER1 mutations (previously unreported) (cases 19–21). Two of the latter individuals (cases 19 and 20) had been screened for DICER1 mutations due to co-existing conditions that raised suspicion of DICER1 syndrome and in the third case (case 21), the DICER1 mutation was revealed by exome sequencing. For these three cases, we present brief case histories, pedigrees and somatic mutation analysis to illustrate some features of DICER1-related PinB. All cases of PinB were diagnosed by experienced neuropathologists at the referring institutions using standard criteria (WHO classification) with appropriate ancillary methods, such as immunostains; no patient had been previously diagnosed with a Rb. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Faculty of Medicine of McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, no. A12-M117-11A. Participants were recruited to the study in compliance with the second edition of the Canadian Tri-Council Policy Statement of Ethical Conduct of Research involving Humans and, because of the ages of the participants, where indicated, eligible relatives signed a consent form in accordance with the above-mentioned IRB protocol.

Table 1.

Pineoblastoma case summary

PinB case Sex Age at
diagnosis		 Vital status Evidence of DICER1
syndrome		 Germ-line DICER1 analysis
 Somatic DICER1 analysis
 DICER1 IHC
Germ-line mutation MLPA Somatic DICER1
mutation		 LOH
1 M 15 mo Deceased 20 months post-Dx Not known Negative3 Negative Negative No LOH ND
2 F 13 mo Deceased 10 months post-Dx Not known Negativea Negative Negative No LOH ND
3 F 6 mo Deceased 10 months post-Dx Not known Negativea Negative Negative 3 × 3’UTR SNPs homozygous ND
4 M 24 mo Alive Not known Not available Negative rs61751177b No LOH ND
5 M 12 mo Not known Not known Negativea Negative Negative No LOH ND
6 M 11 yrs Not known Not known Negative3 Negative Negative 2 × 3’UTR SNPs homozygous ND
7 F 11.7 yrs Alive Not known Negative3 Negative Negative No LOH ND
8 M 3 yrs Alive Bilateral real cysts, Dx 5yrs c.4754C>G, p.(Ser1585*) Not relevant Negative No LOH Loss of staining
9 M 2 mo Deceased 11 months post-Dx None Negative Negative Negative No LOH Staining retained
10 F 3.3 yrs Alive Thyroid nodule, Dx 7yrs c.5103C>A, p.(Tyr1701*) Not relevant (Negative, see LOH) LOH Loss of staining
11 F 17.1 yrs Alive Father: Wilms tumour c.4633dupT, p.(Ser1545Phefs*7) Not relevant (Negative, see LOH) LOH Loss of staining
12 M 5 yrs Not known Not known Not available ND c.3280_3281delTT, p.(Leu1094Argfs*9); c.3675C>G, p.(Tyr1225*) Not relevant Loss of staining
13 F 12 yrs Not known Not known Not available ND c.2040+59insT Not relevant Staining retained
14 M 3 yrs Not known Not known Not available ND c.2040+59insT; rs12018992 Not relevant Staining retained
15c F 11 mo N/A Not known Negative Negative Negative No LOH ND
16 M 8 mo N/A Not known Negative Negative Negative No LOH ND
17 F 2 yrs Alive None Negative Negative Negative No LOH ND
18 F 19 mo Alive None Negative ND Negative Negative ND
19 M 24 yrs Alive Family history of thyroid abnormalities c.1498A>T p.(Lys500*) Not relevant (Negative, see LOH) LOH Loss of staining
20 F 10 years Alive Cervical and vaginal fibroepithelial polyp, SLCT, cERMS, brainstem ERMS c.4050+lG>A Not relevant Not available Not available ND
21 M 2 years Deceased 26 months post-Dx PPB; family history: multinodular goitre; meningeal sarcomad c.4407_4410delTTCT, p.(Ser1470Leufs*19) Not relevant Not available Not available ND
Open in a new tab

Cases 19–21: previously unpublished, selected PinB cases

Dx diagnosis, cERMS cervical embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma, ERMS embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma, F female, LOH loss of heterozygosity, M male, Mo months, MLPA multiplex ligation-based probe amplification assay, ND not done, Post-Dx after diagnosis, PPB pleuropulmonary blastoma, SLCT Sertoli-Leydig cell tumour, SNPs single-nucleotide polymorphisms, UTR untranslated region, Yrs years

a

By default: sequencing studies and MLPA analysis of DICER1 in the tumour samples revealed no mutations

b

In case number 4, we identified a DICER1 sequence polymorphism, c.1935G>A (rs61751177), that is not likely to be pathogenic

c

The same result was found in a cell line established from a metastatic lesion from patient 15

d

Meningeal sarcoma is not definitively associated with the DICER1 syndrome and the patient is untested (Fig. 4c)

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Flow chart summarizing the mode of ascertainment of cases, sample acquisition, molecular analysis and the results of the study. Asterisk indicates samples sequenced by us. Sequencing of gDNA not performed by us was conducted at: referring institution (n = 2), Ambry genetics (Aliso Viejo, CA, USA) (n = 1), Prevention genetics (Marshfield, WI, USA) (n = 2), or at Baylor-Hopkins Center for Mendelian genomics (Houston, TX, USA) (n = 1)

Molecular methods

Sanger sequencing and/or Fluidigm access array-based next-generation sequencing, as described previously [8], was used to identify coding DICER1 mutations and mutations located near the exon–intron boundaries in blood gDNA (n = 4), in gDNA from PinB cell lines (n = 2) [18, 19], in gDNA extracted from fresh frozen tumours (n = 10) and in gDNA we extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumours (n = 7). DNA was extracted from FFPE tumour samples using 3–7 tumour tissue sections, 10 µm in thickness, using the QIAamp DNA FFPE Tissue Kit (QIAGEN, Toronto, ON, Canada) according to manufacturer’s instructions. DNA from fresh frozen tumour tissue was extracted using the Qiagen All-Prep DNA/RNA Mini Kit (QIAGEN, Toronto, ON, Canada). cDNA was synthesized from tumour RNA using the QuantiTect Reverse Transcription Kit (QIAGEN, Toronto, ON, Canada). The germ-line DICER1 mutation was identified in one case through whole exome sequencing; the methods have been previously described [17]. The mode of ascertainment of the cases, sample acquisition and molecular analyses is outlined in Fig. 1 and Supplementary Figure S1.

Tumours were screened for somatic DICER1 RNase III mutations by PCR amplification of gDNA [48, 49] followed by Sanger sequencing [McGill University and Genome Quebec Innovation Centre (MUGQIC)]. We screened for DICER1 mutations occurring outside of the RNase IIIa and IIIb domains using the Fluidigm access array system and next-generation sequencing. Where no germ-line DICER1 mutations were identified by conventional sequencing, we screened for large deletions or duplications using a multiplex ligation-based probe amplification (MLPA) assay (Fig. 1 and Supplementary Figure S1) [39].

LOH analysis in tumour samples was performed by PCR amplification of tumour gDNA concurrently with the patient’s germ-line gDNA (where available), using primers specific to the region of interest [8]. The 150–250 base-pair PCR products were analysed by direct Sanger sequencing and the relative intensity of the peaks at the position of the germ-line DICER1 mutation and/or SNPs (single-nucleotide polymorphisms) within the 3′UTR of the gene were assessed for LOH. Genotyping of the short tandem repeat (STR) markers D14A274, D14S1059, D14S1030 and D14S65 was performed by PCR amplification using end-labelling with 33P γ-ATP followed by separation by acrylamide gel electrophoresis as previously described [45] to ascertain LOH in the absence of coding variants that could be interrogated using Sanger sequencing (Supplementary Figure S1).

Immunohistochemistry (LHC)

Immunohistochemical analysis was performed on deparaffinised 4-µm tissue sections incubated with anti-DICER1 antibody ab14601 (Abcam, Cambridge, MA, USA) as previously reported [36], using a 1:50 dilution. The anti-DICER1 antibody binds to a region within the PAZ domain of the protein. We were able to obtain adequate material to carry out IHC analysis of eight tumours.

Results

The median age at diagnosis of the 21 PinBs was 2 years (range of 2 months to 24 years). Eleven of the patients were male and ten were female, and for the fourteen cases where vital status is known, nine children remain alive and five died of disease 10–26 months post-diagnosis. We identified three unambiguously deleterious germ-line mutations in the eighteen PinBs that had not undergone previous DICER1 genetic testing (cases 1–18) (Table 2). All three mutations—case 8: c.4754C>G, p.(Ser1585*); case 10: c.5103C>A, p.(Tyr1701*); and case 11: c.4633dupT, p.(Ser1545Phefs*7)—are predicted to prematurely truncate the DICER1 protein and each of the mutations was associated with absence of DICER1 immunostaining attributable to a loss of full-length DICER1 protein within the tumours. To look for LOH within the tumours, we used four STR markers mapping in and around DICER1 on chromosome 14q. Informative markers showed LOH in cases 10 and 11 (Supplementary Figure S2). In contrast, no LOH was seen in case 9 (Supplementary Figure S2) which is consistent with our other data (Table 1; Fig. 2a), as no DICER1 DNA or protein abnormality was found in this case. For case 8, no somatic mutation was identified within the tumour. In a fourth case (case 12), two nonsense mutations, c.3280_3281delTT (p.(:eu1094Argfs*9)) and c.3675C>G (p.(Tyr1225*)) were identified within FFPE tumour gDNA, both of which are predicted to prematurely truncate the DICER1 protein (Fig. 3). Without a germ-line gDNA sample available from this case, we were unable to determine whether either of these mutations was in the germ line. Nevertheless, the loss of protein expression in this case suggests bi-allelic inactivation (Table 1). Thus, germ-line mutations were present in three out of eighteen previously untested PinBs. Unexpectedly, there were no somatic missense mutations identified that affected the DICER1 RNase IIIb domain in any of the 19 tumour samples evaluated.

Table 2.

Summary of mutation data

PinB case germ-line DICER1 mutation LOH demonstrated in tumour? DICER1 IHC analysis
8 c.4754C>g, p.(Ser1585*) No Loss of staining
10 c.5103C>A, p.(Tyr1701*) Yes Loss of staining
11 c.4633dupT, p.(Ser1545Phefs*7) Yes Loss of staining
12 c.3280_3281delTT, p.(Leu1094Argfs*9)a; c.3675C>g, p.(Tyr1225*)a No Loss of staining
19 c.1498A>T, p.(Lys500*) Yes Loss of staining
20 c.4050+1g>A ND ND
21 c.4407_4410delTTCT, p.(Ser1470Leufs*19) ND ND
Open in a new tab

IHC immunohistochemistry, ND not done, LOH loss of heterozygosity

a

Mutation identified in tumour DNA, but germ-line vs somatic origin of mutation not determined

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Anti-DICER1 immunostaining (magnification = 20×). Immuno-reactivity for DICER1 retained: panelsa, b and c (cases 9, 14, 13, respectively); and DICER1 immuno-reactivity lost: panels d, e, f, g and h (cases 12, 8, 10, 11, 19, respectively)

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Open in a new tab

Graphic representation of the unfolded DICER1 protein structure (NP_001258211.1) indicating the approximate positions of the germ-line DICER1 mutations observed in the 21 PinB cases being reported. Mutations shaded in blue represent mutations that were identified within tumour gDNA, but are not confirmed to be somatic in origin. Case number indicated at the position of each mutation. DICER1 domains, defined as follows: DExD/H DexD/H box helicase domain, TRBP-BD trans-activating response RNA-binding protein binding domain, HELICc helicase conserved C-terminal domain, DUF283 domain of unknown function, Platform platform domain, PAZ polyubiquitin-associated zinc-finger domain, c.h. connector helix, RNase IIIa Ribonuclease IIIa domain, RNase IIIb ribonuclease IIIb domain, dsRBD double-stranded RNA-binding domain. Mutations: Case 8: germ-line DICER1 amino acid change, p.(Ser1585*); Case 10: germ-line DICER1 amino acid change, p.(Tyr1701*); somatic DICER1 change, loss of heterozygosity (LOH); Case 11: germ-line DICER1 amino acid change, p.(Ser1545Phefs*7); somatic DICER1 change, LOH; Case 12: DICER1 amino acid changes, p.(L1094rfs*9) and p.(Y1225X)—not confirmed to be germ-line or somatic in origin; Case 19: germ-line DICER1 amino acid change, p.(Lys500*); somatic DICER1 change, LOH; Case 20: germ-line DICER1 amino acid change, c.4050+1G>A; Case 21: germ-line DICER1 amino acid change, p.(Ser1470Leufs*19)

We also studied three PinBs from children with previously identified, but unpublished germ-line DICER1 mutations (cases 19–21). These cases were included as they afforded us the opportunity to study PinB in the context of personal medical history and/or family history. These cases are described in detail in Table 1, the pedigrees are shown in Fig. 4 and the mutation data are summarized in Table 2. Notably, case 19 carries a c.1498A>T (p.(Lys500*)) germ-line DICER1 mutation which induces a premature stop codon in the sequence encoding the Helicase domain of the protein (Fig. 3). This mutated transcript was found to be present on analysis of cDNA synthesized from tumour RNA (Fig. 5a, panel II). This suggests that the transcript is not degraded by nonsense-mediated decay (NMD) and subsequent translation thereof would result in the expression of a severely truncated protein. This germ-line DICER1 mutation was accompanied by LOH of the wild-type allele within the tumour (Fig. 5a). Three of five tested family members have been found to carry the c.1498A>T mutation and a family history of hyperthyroidism exists (Fig. 4a).

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Open in a new tab

Case 19: the proband, individual IV-4, was diagnosed with a PinB at the age of 24 years and was found to carry the germ-line mutation, c.1498A>T, in DICER1. Of the five family members tested, three were found to carry the same germ-line DICER1 mutation and all three individuals had hyperthyroidism (individuals II-2, III-2 and III-5). b Case 20: the proband, individual V-6, was diagnosed at 10 years of age with a pineoblastoma, at 15 years of age with cervical and vaginal fibroepithelial polyps, at 16 years of age with a Sertoli–Leydig cell tumour (SLCT) of the left ovary, at 17 years of age with a cervical embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma (cERMS) and a brain-stem ERMS at 21 years of age. She was found to carry the germ-line DICER1 mutation, c.4050+1G>A. Several family members had pulmonary and thyroid abnormalities. c Case 21: the proband (individual IV-3, deceased) was diagnosed at the age of 2 years with a pineoblastoma. At 6 months of age, multiple pulmonary bullae were detected and congenital bullous emphysema was diagnosed. The lung pathology was later reviewed in the light of the whole exome sequencing results and a revision of the diagnosis to pleuropulmonary blastoma (PPB) was made. Both the proband, his mother (individual III-3) and his two brothers (individuals IV-2 and IV-4) were found to carry the c.4407_4410delTTCT germ-line DICER1 mutation. The mother is affected by a multinodular goitre (MNG). Individual IV-5 was diagnosed with a meningeal sarcoma at 3 years of age. Meningeal sarcoma is not definitively associated with the DICER1 syndrome and the patient is untested

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Open in a new tab

Case 19 somatic analysis: aPanel I the germ-line DICER1 mutation, c.1498A>T, indicated by an asteriskPanel II loss of heterozygosity (LOH) of the wild-type allele evident at the position of the germ-line mutation (asterisk) in cDNA synthesized from tumour RNA. b The position of the germ-line DICER1 mutation predicted to truncate the protein (indicated by red arrow), relative to the anti-DICER1 antibody binding site (indicated by a yellow star)

Case 20 carries the c.4050+1G>A germ-line DICER1 variant which is suspected to deleteriously affect transcriptional expression due to the abolition of a donor splice site as predicted by Human Splicing Finder (http://www.umd.be/HSF/4DACTION/input_SSF#). Following the diagnosis of PinB at 10 years of age, this girl was diagnosed with multiple other lesions between the ages of 15 and 21 years. These included vaginal and cervical fibroepithelial polyps diagnosed at 15 years of age, a Sertoli–leydig cell tumour (SLCT) of the left ovary diagnosed at 16 years of age, a cervical embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma (cERMS) diagnosed at 17 years of age, and a brainstem ERMS diagnosed at 21 years of age. SLCT and cERMS are characteristic manifestations of a germ-line DICER1 mutation. The family history includes reports of pulmonary and thyroid abnormalities (Fig. 4b). The PinB tumour tissue was not available from case 20 to allow for somatic analysis of the second allele.

Case 21 carried an inherited germ-line DICER1 mutation (c.4407_4410delTTCT, p.(Ser1470Leufs*19)), which is predicted to truncate the protein subsequent to the RNase IIIa domain if the mutant transcript were to forego NMD (Fig. 3). The proband’s mother, who is affected by multinodular goitre, and two brothers were found to carry the c.4407_4410delTTCT mutation (Fig. 4c). Tumour tissue was not available from this case to allow for somatic analysis.

For eight of the 21 cases (cases 8–14 and case 19), we had sufficient material to carry out IHC studies of DICER1 [36]. The results were consistent with the molecular findings, in that for cases 9, 13 and 14, we did not identify any deleterious DICER1 mutations and all cases showed retained staining of DICER1 (Fig. 2a, b, c). In contrast, in cases 8, 10, 11, 12 and 19, there was no DICER1 expression detected by IHC (Fig. 2d – h). Tumours from case 10 and case 11 carried two inactivating mutations (one germ-line truncating mutation and LOH within the tumour) and in case 12, the absence of staining for DICER1 strongly suggests the two predicted truncating mutations are present in trans (Fig. 2d). In case 8, we only found one likely deleterious mutation and no second somatic hit, but notably, DICER1 staining was absent (Fig. 2e). This suggests that the wild-type allele has been inactivated by some other mechanism resulting in the absence of full-length, functional DICER1 protein in this tumour. In case 19, as described above, we demonstrated that the mutated transcript was not subjected to NMD and expression of a severely truncated protein is predicted. The binding site of the anti-DICER1 antibody is downstream of the predicted truncation site (Fig. 5b) and therefore the expression of the mutant protein was not detected on IHC analysis (Fig. 2h).

Discussion

The results from this study establish DICER1 as an important susceptibility gene for PinB, a tumour which we have now shown to be a manifestation of the DICER1 syndrome

The pineocyte and retinal receptor cells share a common embryonic origin in humans [29], explaining the rare syndrome of “trilateral Rb” in RB-1 mutation carriers. Interestingly, DICER1 has not been demonstrated to have any tumourigenic role in Rb, although, for a small percentage of Rb’s, the genetic underpinnings remain unexplained [37].

In addition to the molecular results reported here, PinB has been clinically associated with a particular neuraxis manifestation of DICER1 mutations: ciliary body medulloepithelioma (CBME) [31, 44]. Two children with both PinB and CBME have been reported [24, 34]. Intracranial medulloepithelioma has also been reported in a kindred that likely harbours a DICER1 mutation [5]. These observations suggest a possible cell-of-origin relationship between anterior elements in the globe and the pineal gland.

All six germ-line DICER1 mutations identified (three identified in this study and three previously identified) (Table 2) are loss-of-function mutations that inactivate one allele of DICER1. The mutations identified in cases 11, 19 and 21 are confirmed to be inherited. Notably, the father of patient 11 carries the c.4633dupT mutation and was affected by a Wilms tumour in childhood (Table 1). Three cases (case 10, 11 and 19) were found to exhibit loss of the wild-type allele in addition to the deleterious germ-line DICER1 mutation (Table 2 and Supplementary Figure S2) resulting in the complete loss of DICER1 expression within the tumours (Fig. 2). These preliminary findings indicate that the mechanism by which the second allele is inactivated in PinB may differ from that in other DICER1 syndrome diseases. Almost all reported somatic mutations observed in DICER1-related tumour types affect the metal ion-binding residues of the RNase IIIa or IIIb domains (e.g. Glu1705, Asp1709, Asp1810 and Glu1813) [1, 15]. These so-called “hotspot” missense mutations have been shown to shift the expression of mature miRNAs within the tumours towards 3p–derived miRNAs as a consequence of reduced 5p miRNA-strand processing [1, 14]. We observed no such missense mutations in six PinBs with available data. This was compared with 59 hotspot mutations in 60 DICER1-related tumours occurring at other sites (P = 7.7 × 10−8, Fisher’s exact test) (Supplementary Table S1). These data suggest that the absence of missense RNase IIIb mutations in PinB is unlikely to be a chance finding. In contrast to what is seen in other DICER1-related tumours, LOH of the DICER1 locus is the most frequent “second hit” in PinBs.

This phenomenon of DICER1 LOH shown here in three PinBs and reported only once previously [38], contests the hypothesis based on a murine model that complete loss of DICER1 is disadvantageous to tumour development in humans. Results from in vivo analysis conducted by two independent research groups demonstrate that DICER1 may function as a haplo-insufficient tumour suppressor: the loss of one DICER1 allele in both a retinoblastoma mouse model [22] and a Kras-driven lung cancer mouse model [21] enhanced tumourigenesis; however, deletion of the second DICER1 allele did not further promote tumour proliferation or initiation, but instead impeded it [21, 22]. LOH of the wild-type allele, as now seen in a total of four PinBs, suggests DICER1 functions as a conventional tumour suppressor in the pineal gland, whereby both alleles are inactivated, initiating tumour development. LOH has been identified in two cases of pituitary blastoma [8], but has not been seen in any other DICER1-related tumours [3, 13, 16, 44]. Furthermore, conditional inactivation of DICER1 in murine retinal cells results in progressive and extensive retinal degeneration [6]. However, inactivation of DICER1 in pineocytes as a result of a truncating mutation in DICER1 coupled with LOH of the wild-type allele (as seen in this study) does not seem to have the same degenerative effect. Interestingly, inactivation of DICER1 in mouse radial glial cells results in the over-production of cortical neurons [28]. This enhanced proliferation may be more in keeping with the tumourigenic events that take place within the pineal gland subsequent to DICER1 inactivation. Overall, the complete loss of DICER1 is seemingly selected against in most cell lineages, but is tolerated in the pineal gland, permitting the progression to PinB. We suspect that other gain- or loss-of-function mutations of other cancer genes may also be required to permit or facilitate the complete loss of DICER1 in PinB. The mechanism of tumourigenesis as a consequence of total loss of DICER1 expression within these tumours remains to be explored. Further studies on this rare tumour will focus on mRNA, miRNA and gDNA profiling.

Also of note is the significantly lower median age of onset of PinB in our cohort (2 years), relative to the previously reported mean age of onset of 12.6 years [12, 26]. This disparity is likely due to the ascertainment of 13 cases from children’s hospitals (Cases 1–11, 17–18 and 20). The age of onset of PinBs found to harbour DICER1 mutations is far less defined than other tumour types occurring within the DICER1 syndrome.

Numerous diseases occur in the DICER1 predisposition syndrome and most DICER1 mutations are inherited. Thus, finding a germ-line mutation in a PinB patient may have implications for the patient and family. Our recommendations include genetic counselling, family education and sequencing of the parents and, if indicated, other family members. Careful re-examination of the extended family medical history and of pathology specimens can reveal previously unrecognized associated conditions. The advisability of prospective screening for various phenotypes is uncertain, given that syndrome diseases are rare, generally not life threatening and may present over the first three to four decades of life. Screening particularly for pleuropulmonary blastoma, which is highly curable in an early form in infancy but may progress to an aggressive, much-less-curable sarcoma after age 2 years, may be advisable [41].

To our knowledge, this is the first detailed study to interrogate the possible involvement of DICER1 in PinB pathogenesis. limitations of the study include the small number of cases recruited and possible bias in the selection of cases: although we did not include patients known to carry germ-line DICER1 mutations in calculating the prevalence of DICER1 mutations, we are aware that clinic-based ascertainment schemas have their own biases. For this reason, larger studies with more complete ascertainment will be needed to confirm and extend our findings.

Conclusion

This study suggests that germ-line DICER1 mutations make a clinically significant contribution to PinB, establishing DICER1 as an important susceptibility gene for PinB. The means by which the second allele is inactivated seems to differ from other DICER1-related tumours. The total loss of DICER1 protein in the cells challenges the haplo-insufficiency model of DICER1 action. These data, combined with the other reported instance of PinB occurring in a germ-line DICER1 mutation carrier, indicate that PinB is a recognized manifestation of a germ-line DICER1 mutation. To determine the true prevalence of DICER1 mutations in PinB, analysis of a larger unselected series of PinBs is required. From a clinical perspective, the importance of these findings is that DICER1 genetic testing should be considered for all patients diagnosed with a PinB. Furthermore, these children and their immediate family members (in a setting of an inherited DICER1 mutation) may be susceptible to other DICER1-associated conditions, and as such, referral to genetic counsellors and surveillance for early detection may be considered. DICER1 IHC may also serve as an easily applicable screening tool for the presence of DICER1 mutations in PinB.

Supplementary Material

Supplemental

Acknowledgments

We thank the Children’s Cancer and Leukaemia Group Tumour Bank for samples, Lisa Storer, Laura Zahavich, Dr Ute Bartels, Dr John-Paul Kilday, Dr Paul Nathan, Dr Armando Lorenzo, Dr Nalin Gupta and Dr Sharon Plon for their assistance with ascertainment and analysis of their respective cases and members of the Baylor-Hopkins Center for Mendelian Genomics their help with the exome sequencing of case 21. We also thank Pierre Lepage and the MUGQIC staff for designing primers for, optimizing and performing the Fluidigm Access Array capture and sequencing, and N. Benlimame (George and Olga Minarik Research Pathology Facility, Jewish General Hospital) for help with immunohistochemical analysis. This research was made possible thanks to the support of Alex’s Lemonade Stand Foundation and The Brain Tumour Charity who fund the CNS PNET research at CBTRC. The identification of a DICER1 mutation in one patient was made by whole exome sequencing conducted at the Center for Men-delian genomics, funded by The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and supported by the National Human Genome Research Institute grant U54Hg006542 to the Baylor-Hopkins Center for Mendelian Genomics.

Footnotes

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00401-014-1318-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Contributor Information

Leanne de Kock, Department of Human genetics, Mcgill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Medical Genetics, The Lady Davis Institute, Segal Cancer Centre, Jewish General Hospital, 3755 Cote St. Catherine Road, Montreal, QC H3T 1E2, Canada.

Nelly Sabbaghian, Department of Medical Genetics, The Lady Davis Institute, Segal Cancer Centre, Jewish General Hospital, 3755 Cote St. Catherine Road, Montreal, QC H3T 1E2, Canada.

Harriet Druker, Division of Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick, Children, The University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Department of Molecular and Medical genetics, The University, of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Evan Weber, Department of Medical genetics, research Institute of the, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Nancy Hamel, Department of Medical genetics, research Institute of the, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Program in Cancer genetics, Department of Oncology, and Human genetics, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Suzanne Miller, Children’s Brain Tumour research Center, School of Clinical Sciences, Queen’s Medical Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

Catherine S. Choong, Child and Adolescent Health Service, Subiaco, WA, Australia Department of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Princess Margaret Hospital for Children, Perth, WA, Australia.

Nicholas G. Gottardo, Department of Paediatric Oncology/Haematology, Princess Margaret Hospital for Children, Perth, Australia Division of Children’s leukaemia and Cancer research, Telethon, Kids Institute, The University of Western Australia, Perth,Australia.

Ursula R. Kees, Division of Children’s leukaemia and Cancer research, Telethon, Kids Institute, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia

Surya P. Rednam, Department of Pediatrics, Hematology-Oncology, Baylor College, of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

Liselotte P. van Hest, Department of Clinical genetics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Marjolijn C. Jongmans, Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Shalini Jhangiani, Human Genome Sequencing Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.

James R. Lupski, Human Genome Sequencing Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA Department of Molecular and Human genetics, Baylor College, of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA; Texas Children’s Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.

Margaret Zacharin, Department of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Royal Children’s Hospital, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Dorothée Bouron-Dal Soglio, Department of Pathology, CHU-Sainte Justine and University, of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Annie Huang, Division of Hematology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.

John R. Priest, Minneapolis, MN, USA

Arie Perry, Departments of Pathology and Neurological Surgery, UCSF, Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Sabine Mueller, Departments of Neurology, Pediatrics and Neurosurgery, UCSF, Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Steffen Albrecht, Department of Pathology, Montreal Children’s Hospital, and McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.

David Malkin, Division of Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick, Children, The University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Departments of Pediatrics and Medical Biophysics, The, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Department of Paediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Richard G. Grundy, Children’s Brain Tumour research Center, School of Clinical Sciences, Queen’s Medical Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

William D. Foulkes, Email: william.foulkes@mcgill.ca, Department of Human genetics, Mcgill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Medical Genetics, The Lady Davis Institute, Segal Cancer Centre, Jewish General Hospital, 3755 Cote St. Catherine Road, Montreal, QC H3T 1E2, Canada; Department of Medical genetics, research Institute of the, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada; Program in Cancer genetics, Department of Oncology, and Human genetics, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.

References

  • 1.Anglesio MS, Wang Y, Yang W, Senz J, Wan A, Heravi-Moussavi A, Salamanca C, Maines-Bandiera S, Huntsman DG, Morin GB. Cancer-associated somatic DICER1 hotspot mutations cause defective miRNA processing and reverse-strand expression bias to predominantly mature 3p strands through loss of 5p strand cleavage. J Pathol. 2013;229(3):400–409. doi: 10.1002/path.4135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Bahubeshi A, Bal N, Rio Frio T, Hamel N, Pouchet C, Yilmaz A, Bouron-Dal Soglio D, Williams GM, Tischkowitz M, Priest JR, Foulkes WD. Germline DICER1 mutations and familial cystic nephroma. J Med genet. 2010;47(12):863–866. doi: 10.1136/jmg.2010.081216. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Bahubeshi A, Tischkowitz M, Foulkes WD. miRNA processing and human cancer: DICER1 cuts the mustard. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3(111):111ps–146ps. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3002493. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Blach LE, McCormick B, Abramson DH, Ellsworth RM. Trilateral retinoblastoma-incidence and outcome: a decade of experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1994;29(4):729–733. doi: 10.1016/0360-3016(94)90560-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Cross SF, Arbuckle S, Priest JR, Marshall G, Charles A, Dalla Pozza L. Familial pleuropulmonary blastoma in Australia. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2010;55(7):1417–1419. doi: 10.1002/pbc.22592. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Damiani D, Alexander JJ, O’rourke JR, McManus M, Jadhav AP, Cepko CL, Hauswirth WW, Harfe BD, Strettoi E. Dicer inactivation leads to progressive functional and structural degeneration of the mouse retina. J Neurosci. 2008;28(19):4878–4887. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0828-08.2008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.de Kock L, Plourde F, Carter MT, Hamel N, Srivastava A, Meyn MS, Arseneau J, Soglio DB, Foulkes WD. germ-line and somatic DICER1 mutations in a pleuropulmonary blastoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2013;60(12):2091–2092. doi: 10.1002/pbc.24692. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.de Kock L, Sabbaghian N, Plourde F, Srivastava A, Weber E, Bouron-Dal Soglio D, Hamel N, Choi JH, Park SH, Deal CL, Kelsey MM, Dishop MK, esbenshade A, Kuttesch JF, Jacques TS, Perry A, Leichter H, Maeder P, Brundler MA, Warner J, Neal J, Zacharin M, Korbonits M, Cole T, Traunecker H, Mclean TW, rotondo F, Lepage P, Albrecht S, Horvath E, Kovacs K, Priest JR, Foulkes WD. Pituitary blastoma: a pathognomonic feature of germ-line DICER1 mutations. Acta Neuropathol. 2014 doi: 10.1007/s00401-014-1285-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.de Kock L, Sabbaghian N, Soglio DB, Guillerman RP, Park BK, Chami R, Deal CL, Priest JR, Foulkes WD. exploring the association between DICER1 mutations and differentiated thyroid carcinoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014 doi: 10.1210/jc.2013-4206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Doros l, Yang J, Dehner L, Rossi CT, Skiver K, Jarzembowski JA, Messinger Y, Schultz KA, Williams G, Andre N, Hill DA. DICER1 mutations in embryonal rhabdomyosarcomas from children with and without familial PPB-tumor predisposition syndrome. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2012;59(3):558–560. doi: 10.1002/pbc.24020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Doros LA, Rossi CT, Yang J, Field A, Williams GM, Messinger Y, Cajaiba MM, Perlman EJ, A Schultz K, Cathro HP, Legallo RD, Lafortune KA, Chikwava KR, Faria P, Geller JI, Dome JS, Mullen EA, Gratias EJ, Dehner LP, Hill DA. DICER1 mutations in childhood cystic nephroma and its relationship to DICER1-renal sarcoma. Mod Pathol. 2014 doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2013.242. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Fauchon F, Jouvet A, Paquis P, Saint-Pierre G, Mottolese C, Ben Hassel M, Chauveinc l, Sichez JP, Philippon J, Schlienger M, Bouffet E. Parenchymal pineal tumors: a clinicopathological study of 76 cases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;46(4):959–968. doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(99)00389-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Foulkes WD, Bahubeshi A, Hamel N, Pasini B, Asioli S, Baynam G, Choong CS, Charles A, Frieder RP, Dishop MK, Graf N, Ekim M, Bouron-Dal Soglio D, Arseneau J, Young RH, Sabbaghian N, Srivastava A, Tischkowitz MD, Priest JR. extending the phenotypes associated with DICER1 mutations. Hum Mutat. 2011;32(12):1381–1384. doi: 10.1002/humu.21600. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Gurtan AM, Lu V, Bhutkar A, Sharp PA. In vivo structure-function analysis of human Dicer reveals directional processing of precursor miRNAs. RNA. 2012;18(6):1116–1122. doi: 10.1261/rna.032680.112. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Heravi-Moussavi A, Anglesio MS, Cheng SW, Senz J, Yang W, Prentice l, Fejes AP, Chow C, Tone A, Kalloger SE, Hamel N, roth A, Ha G, Wan AN, Maines-Bandiera S, Salamanca C, Pasini B, Clarke BA, lee AF, Lee CH, Zhao C, Young RH, Aparicio SA, Sorensen PH, Woo MM, Boyd N, Jones SJ, Hirst M, Marra MA, Gilks B, Shah SP, Foulkes WD, Morin GB, Huntsman DG. recurrent somatic DICER1 mutations in nonepithelial ovarian cancers. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(3):234–242. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1102903. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Hill DA, Ivanovich J, Priest JR, Gurnett CA, Dehner LP, Desruisseau D, Jarzembowski JA, Wikenheiser-Brokamp KA, Suarez BK, Whelan AJ, Williams G, Bracamontes D, Messinger Y, Goodfellow PJ. DICER1 mutations in familial pleuropulmonary blastoma. Science. 2009;325(5943):965. doi: 10.1126/science.1174334. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Karaca E, Weitzer S, Pehlivan D, Shiraishi H, Gogakos T, Hanada T, Jhangiani SN, Wiszniewski W, Withers M, Campbell IM, Erdin S, Isikay S, Franco LM, Gonzaga-Jauregui C, Gambin T, Gelowani V, Hunter JV, Yesil G, Koparir E, Yilmaz S, Brown M, Briskin D, Hafner M, Morozov P, Farazi TA, Bernreuther C, Glatzel M, Trattnig S, Friske J, Kronnerwetter C, Bainbridge MN, Gezdirici A, Seven M, Muzny DM, Boerwinkle E, Ozen M, Clausen T, Tuschl T, Yuksel A, Hess A, Gibbs RA, Martinez J, Penninger JM, Lupski JR. Human CLP1 mutations alter tRNA biogenesis, affecting both peripheral and central nervous system function. Cell. 2014;157(3):636–650. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.02.058. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Kees UR, Biegel JA, Ford J, Ranford PR, Peroni SE, Hallam LA, Parmiter AH, Willoughby ML, Spagnolo D. enhanced MYCN expression and isochromosome 17q in pineoblastoma cell lines. genes Chromosomes Cancer. 1994;9(2):129–135. doi: 10.1002/gcc.2870090209. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Kees UR, Spagnolo D, Hallam LA, Ford J, Ranford PR, Baker DL, Callen DF, Biegel JA. A new pineoblastoma cell line, Per-480, with der(10)t(10;17), der(16)t(1;16), and enhanced MYC expression in the absence of gene amplification. Cancer genet Cytogenet. 1998;100(2):159–164. doi: 10.1016/s0165-4608(97)00030-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Kivela T. Trilateral retinoblastoma: a meta-analysis of hereditary retinoblastoma associated with primary ectopic intracranial retinoblastoma. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(6):1829–1837. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1999.17.6.1829. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Kumar MS, Pester re, Chen CY, lane K, Chin C, Lu J, Kirsch DG, Golub TR, Jacks T. DICER1 functions as a haplo-insufficient tumor suppressor. genes Dev. 2009;23(23):2700–2704. doi: 10.1101/gad.1848209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Lambertz I, Nittner D, Mestdagh P, Denecker G, Vandesompele J, Dyer MA, Marine JC. Monoallelic but not biallelic loss of DICER1 promotes tumorigenesis in vivo. Cell Death Differ. 2010;17(4):633–641. doi: 10.1038/cdd.2009.202. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Lesnick JE, Chayt KJ, Bruce DA, Rorke LB, Trojanow-ski J, Savino PJ, Schatz NJ. Familial pineoblastoma. report of two cases. J Neurosurg. 1985;62(6):930–932. doi: 10.3171/jns.1985.62.6.0930. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Mamalis N, Font RL, Anderson CW, Monson MC, Williams AT. Concurrent benign teratoid medulloepithelioma and pine-oblastoma. Ophthalmic Surg. 1992;23(6):403–408. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Marees T, Moll AC, Imhof SM, de Boer MR, Ringens PJ, van Leeuwen FE. re: more about second cancers after retinoblastoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(11):831–832. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djp207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Mena H, rushing EJ, Ribas JL, Delahunt B, McCarthy WF. Tumors of pineal parenchymal cells: a correlation of histological features, including nucleolar organizer regions, with survival in 35 cases. Hum Pathol. 1995;26(1):20–30. doi: 10.1016/0046-8177(95)90110-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Moll AC, Imhof SM, Bouter LM, Kuik DJ, Den Otter W, Bezemer PD, Koten JW, Tan KE. Second primary tumors in patients with hereditary retinoblastoma: a register-based follow-up study, 1945–1994. Int J Cancer. 1996;67(4):515–519. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19960807)67:4<515::AID-IJC9>3.0.CO;2-V. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Nowakowski TJ, Mysiak KS, O’leary T, Fotaki V, Pratt T, Price DJ. loss of functional Dicer in mouse radial glia cell-autonomously prolongs cortical neurogenesis. Dev Biol. 2013;382(2):530–537. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2013.08.023. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Olsson R. Subcommissural ependyma and pineal organ development in human fetuses. Gen Comp endocrinol. 1961;1:117–123. doi: 10.1016/0016-6480(61)90039-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Peyster RG, Ginsberg F, Hoover ED. Computed tomography of familial pineoblastoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1986;10(1):32–33. doi: 10.1097/00004728-198601000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Priest JR, Williams GM, Manera R, Jenkinson H, Brundler MA, Davis S, Murray TG, Galliani CA, Dehner LP. Ciliary body medulloepithelioma: four cases associated with pleuropulmonary blastoma-a report from the International Pleuropulmonary Blastoma registry. Br J Ophthalmol. 2011;95(7):1001–1005. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2010.189779. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Priest JR, Williams GM, Mize WA, Dehner LP, McDermott MB. Nasal chondromesenchymal hamartoma in children with pleuropulmonary blastoma-a report from the International Pleuropulmonary Blastoma registry registry. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2010;74(11):1240–1244. doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2010.07.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Pugh TJ, Yu W, Yang J, Field AL, Ambrogio l, Carter SL, Cibul-skis K, Giannikopoulos P, Kiezun A, Kim J, McKenna A, Nickerson E, Getz G, Hoffher S, Messinger YH, Dehner LP, Roberts CW, Rodriguez-Galindo C, Williams GM, Rossi CT, Meyer-son M, Hill DA. Exome sequencing of pleuropulmonary blastoma reveals frequent biallelic loss of TP53 and two hits in DICER1 resulting in retention of 5p–derived mirNA hairpin loop sequences. Oncogene. 2014 doi: 10.1038/onc.2014.150. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Ramasubramanian A, Correa ZM, Augsburger JJ, Sisk RA, Plager DA. Medulloepithelioma in DICER1 syndrome treated with resection. Eye (Lond) 2013;27(7):896–897. doi: 10.1038/eye.2013.87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Ramasubramanian A, Kytasty C, Meadows AT, Shields JA, Leahey A, Shields CL. Incidence of pineal gland cyst and pineoblastoma in children with retinoblastoma during the chemoreduction era. Am J Ophthalmol. 2013;156(4):825–829. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2013.05.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Rio Frio T, Bahubeshi A, Kanellopoulou C, Hamel N, Niedziela M, Sabbaghian N, Pouchet C, gilbert l, O’Brien PK, Serfas K, Broderick P, Houlston RS, Lesueur F, Bonora E, Muljo S, Schimke RN, Bouron-Dal Soglio D, Arseneau J, Schultz KA, Priest JR, Nguyen VH, Harach HR, Livingston DM, Foulkes WD, Tischkowitz M. DICER1 mutations in familial multinodular goiter with and without ovarian Sertoli-Leydig cell tumors. JAMA. 2011;305(1):68–77. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.1910. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Rushlow DE, Mol BM, Kennett JY, Yee S, Pajovic S, Thériault BL, Prigoda-Lee NL, Spencer C, Dimaras H, Corson TW, Pang R, Massey C, Godbout R, Jiang Z, Zacksenhaus E, Paton K, Moll AC, Houdayer C, Raizis A, Halliday W, Lam WL, Boutros PC, Lohmann D, Dorsman JC, Gallie BL. Characterisation of retinoblastomas without RB1 mutations: genomic, gene expression, and clinical studies. lancet Oncol. 2013;14(4):327–334. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70045-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Sabbaghian N, Hamel N, Srivastava A, Albrecht S, Priest JR, Foulkes WD. Germline DICER1 mutation and associated loss of heterozygosity in a pineoblastoma. J Med genet. 2012;49(7):417–419. doi: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2012-100898. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Sabbaghian N, Srivastava A, Hamel N, Plourde F, Gajtko-Metera M, Niedziela M, Foulkes WD. Germ-line deletion in DICER1 revealed by a novel MLPA assay using synthetic oligonucleotides. Eur J Hum Genet. 2013 doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2013.215. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Schild SE, Scheithauer BW, Schomberg PJ, Hook CC, Kelly PJ, Frick l, Robinow JS, Buskirk SJ. Pineal parenchymal tumors. Clinical, pathologic, and therapeutic aspects. Cancer. 1993;72(3):870–880. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19930801)72:3<870::aid-cncr2820720336>3.0.co;2-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Schultz KA, Harris A, Williams GM, Baldinger S, Doros l, Valusek P, Frazier AL, Dehner LP, Messinger Y, Hill DA. Judicious DICER1 testing and surveillance imaging facilitates early diagnosis and cure of pleuropulmonary blastoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2014 doi: 10.1002/pbc.25092. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Seki M, Yoshida K, Shiraishi Y, Shimamura T, Sato Y, Nishimura R, Okuno Y, Chiba K, Tanaka H, Kato K, Kato M, Hanada R, Nomura Y, Park MJ, Ishida T, Oka A, Igarashi T, Miyano S, Hayashi Y, Ogawa S, Takita J. Biallelic DICER1 mutations in sporadic pleuropulmonary blastoma. Cancer res. 2014 doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-2470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Shields Cl, Meadows AT, Shields JA, Carvalho C, Smith AF. Chemoreduction for retinoblastoma may prevent intracranial neuroblastic malignancy (trilateral retinoblastoma) Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119(9):1269–1272. doi: 10.1001/archopht.119.9.1269. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Slade I, Bacchelli C, Davies H, Murray A, Abbaszadeh F, Hanks S, Barfoot R, Burke A, Chisholm J, Hewitt M, Jenkinson H, King D, Morland B, Pizer B, Prescott K, Saggar A, Side l, Traunecker H, Vaidya S, Ward P, Futreal PA, Vujanic G, Nicholson AG, Sebire N, Turnbull C, Priest JR, Pritchard-Jones K, Houlston R, Stiller C, Stratton MR, Douglas J, Rahman N. DICER1 syndrome: clarifying the diagnosis, clinical features and management implications of a pleiotropic tumour predisposition syndrome. J Med genet. 2011;48(4):273–278. doi: 10.1136/jmg.2010.083790. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Tischkowitz M, Xia B, Sabbaghian N, Reis-Filho JS, Hamel N, Li G, van Beers EH, Li L, Khalil T, Quenneville LA, Omeroglu A, Poll A, Lepage P, Wong N, Nederlof PM, Ashworth A, Tonin PN, Narod SA, livingston DM, Foulkes WD. Analysis of PALB2/FANCN-associated breast cancer families. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2007;104(16):6788–6793. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0701724104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Tomiak E, de Kock L, Grynspan D, Ramphal R, Foulkes WD. DICER1 mutations in an adolescent with cervical embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma (cERMS) Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2014;61(3):568–569. doi: 10.1002/pbc.24826. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Turaka K, Shields CL, Meadows AT, Leahey A. Second malignant neoplasms following chemoreduction with carboplatin, etoposide, and vincristine in 245 patients with intraocular retinoblastoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2012;59(1):121–125. doi: 10.1002/pbc.23278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Witkowski l, Mattina J, Schonberger S, Murray MJ, Choong CS, Huntsman Dg, Reis-Filho JS, McCluggage WG, Nicholson JC, Coleman N, Calaminus G, Schneider DT, Arseneau J, Stewart CJ, Foulkes WD. DICER1 hotspot mutations in non-epithelial gonadal tumours. Br J Cancer. 2013;109(10):2744–2750. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2013.637. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Wu MK, Sabbaghian N, Xu B, Addidou-Kalucki S, Bernard C, Zou D, reeve Ae, Eccles Mr, Cole C, Choong CS, Charles A, Tan TY, Iglesias DM, Goodyer PR, Foulkes WD. Biallelic DICER1 mutations occur in Wilms tumours. J Pathol. 2013;230(2):154–164. doi: 10.1002/path.4196. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplemental
NIHMS673221-supplement-Supplemental.docx (998.3KB, docx)

RESOURCES